TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. It was a case where the petitioner had purchased from the Reliance Industries Limited the HSD in the course of inter-state trade for use of mining activities. The petitioners as the ultimate consumers had sought before the Court the amount of excess tax by producing the C-form, which had been issued by the Rajasthan authority. The excess tax had been collected by the seller Reliance Industries Limited, the CST Authority at Rajasthan. Since they issued the C-form declaration in respect of the transaction in question and the seller had already been collected the tax from the petitioner, the refund was directed not to be given by the Reliance Industries on the ground that it was not entitled to such refund as the claim would be hit by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed AGP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner is a limited company and a public sector undertaking of the Government of India. It is registered with Uttar Pradesh VAT Authority and Haryana VAT Authority. Petitioner entered into Gas sale and Purchase Agreement with M/s. Petronet LNG Ltd. Petitioner purchased Regasified Liquefied Natural Gas - Commodity Code-04008001 at an agreed price from the Petronet. The goods were transported through pipeline from Petronet, Bharuch Gujarat to premises of the petitioner located in Uttar Pradesh Haryana. 3. It is averred that the petitioner procured the said goods at concessional rate of 2% against the production of C- forms before the introduction of G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (12) GSTL 248 (P H)] held that the Sales Tax Department are liable to issue C-forms in respect of the natural gas purchased from the oil companies in Gujarat and used in the generation or distribution of electricity at its power plant at Haryana. This ambiguity resulted into the petitioner paying 15% of tax under the CST Act. However, with the Carpo Power Limited decision (Supra), the decision applied for C-form against the inter-State procurement done from Petronet before the U.P. VAT Authority and before Haryana VAT Authority. They issued C-forms against the purchases made from the Petronet and pursuant to issuance of the C-forms by the respective VAT authority and after clearance of ambiguity, the petitioner furnished the certifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esentatives to adjudicate the refund application filed by the petitioner under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 forthwith; (c) pending Notice, admission and disposing of this petition, this Hon ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents, their sub-ordinates, agents or their representatives: (i) to forthwith sanction the refund claim of the petitioner with such terms and conditions as deemed fit and proper by this Hon ble Court; or (ii) to direct the respondents, their sub-ordinates, agents or their representatives to decide the pending refund application forthwith without any further delay; (d) for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (C) above. (e) for costs of the petitioner be provided; and (f) for such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the principles of unjust, enrichment. In that case, the petitioner had furnished the statement showing the details of the purchases, tax charged and submission of C forms against the purchases as well as copy of sample invoices, etc. and the Court therefore, held that the petitioner duly complied with the direction issued by the Rajasthan High Court, the respondent authority was bound to process the refund claims under Section-11(B) of the Central Excise Act. The respondents accordingly were directed to process the refund claims of the respective petitioners and grant refund of the tax amount collected from the petitioners and deposited by the seller in accordance with law within stipulated time period. 9. On seeking instructions, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
