TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 1156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax to the petitioner, the application of the petitioner for refund cannot be rejected only on the ground of delay in making the same. Both the objections of the respondents that the scheme does not envisage extension of time for making application for refund and that the petitioner at the outset had not made out any grounds justifying delay, are turned down. On record, the petitioner has produced applications for grant of certificate by the VAT authorities and copies of reminders. However, that all these aspects be first examined by the District Industrial Centre. The District Industrial Centre shall consider the petitioner s further representations both dated 13.07.2020 copies of which are produced at Annexure-9 to the petition an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the VAT etc. under the said scheme for period between 01.01.2016 to 31.12.2016 and thereafter from 01.01.2017 to 30.06.2017. The petitioner first applied under two separate applications for such refund to the District Industries Centre on 23.06.2020 along with all necessary documents. These applications of the petitioner were rejected by the District Industries Centre by two separate orders both dated 25.06.2020. The sole ground cited for rejection of the petitioner s applications was that the claim was submitted after expiry of two years from the period to which the claim related. 3. The petitioner thereupon again approached the District Industrial Centre under a communication dated 13.07.2020 and made out detailed grounds for not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the said scheme, of course subject to fulfillment of the conditions contained therein. The scheme also envisages time limit for making application for refund. However, if the VAT department of the Government had delayed issuing necessary certificates of payment of tax to the petitioner, the application of the petitioner for refund cannot be rejected only on the ground of delay in making the same. Surely one department of the Government cannot cite the reason of another department not acting promptly enough to deny the benefit declared by the Government under the scheme. Further it may be true that the petitioner had not explained such reasons in the applications for refund. However, when the petitioner made a detailed further submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
