TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een purchased by the Petitioner/ Company from Indian Oil Corporation in the course of inter-State trade for use in mining activities and therefore, the question of passing of the tax burden to anyone would not arise and the respondent authorities are not justified in not processing the refund claims of the Petitioner / Company. The respondents are directed to process the refund claim of the petitioner and grant refund of the tax amount collected from the petitioner and deposited by the seller, in accordance with law within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment - petition allowed. - CWP No.11262 of 2020 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 25-2-2021 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH Present: Ms. Vanita Bhargava, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, DAG, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5. SANT PARKASH, J. [The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court.] CM-560-2021 Prayer in the application is for placing on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HSD after payment of a higher rate of tax during the period October 2017 to March 2018. On account of this, the petitioner paid an excess tax amounting to ₹ 93,72,244/-. To seek refund of the aforesaid amount, the Petitioner/ Company approached the Rajasthan High Court by way of a writ petition bearing CWP No.5475 of 2018. The said writ petition was allowed by the Rajasthan High Court vide order dated 28.09.2018 ( P-5 ) by placing reliance on a judgment of its own Court rendered in CWP No.5506 of 2018 (Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs The State of Rajasthan and others). Feeling aggrieved from the said order, the State of Rajasthan preferred an intra court appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 16.07.2019 (P-7). The said decision was further upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 03.02.2020 (P-9). Subsequently, C-Forms were issued by the State of Rajasthan to the petitioner company. In the meanwhile, Indian Oil Corporation vide its letter dated 09.10.2019 informed the Petitioner/ Company that since it had deposited the tax with the Haryana Sales Tax Department, it should approach the concerned Department for refund of tax paid by the Petitioner / ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as Section 20(1) and (7) of the HVAT Act. It is apt to notice that issues relating to refund of CST are governed by provisions of State VAT Acts. Section 20(5) of the HVAT Act reads as under:- 20(5) Any amount refundable to any person as a result of an order passed by any court, appellate authority or revising authority, shall be refunded to him on an application containing the prescribed particulars accompanied with the prescribed documents made in the prescribed manner to the prescribed authority. Section 20(1) and (7) of the HVAT reads as under:- (1) If any person has charged any amount purported to be tax in excess of the tax leviable, no order allowing refund of the excess amount shall be passed in his favour by any authority under this Act or by any court unless he refunds such amount to those from whom it was charged, and where charged, and where from a VAT dealer, the input tax shall be duly adjusted. XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX (7) Before any refund is given to any person under this Act it shall be first adjusted with any amount due from him under this Act or the Central Act for any period and the balance, if any, only shall be refunded to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e up for consideration before this Court in the case of Carpo Power Limited (supra) as also before Gujarat High Court in J.K. Cement's case (supra), wherein a number of judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court have been discussed. The relevant observations recorded in J.K. Cement s case (supra) read as under:- 19. In the opinion of this court, in the light of the clear directions issued by the Rajasthan High Court in the judgment and order referred to hereinabove, which the respondent authorities are bound to comply with, upon the petitioners making applications for refund along with the requisite documents, the respondents were duty bound to process such claim within a period of twelve weeks from the date of such application. The stand adopted by the respondents that the refund can be made to only to Reliance Industries Limited flies in the face of the order passed by the Rajasthan High Court as well as the above-referred decisions on which reliance has been placed by the learned advocate for the petitioners and is nothing but a purely hyper technical stand adopted by them. Once Reliance Industries Limited has, in clear terms, written to the authorities that various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
