Kerala High Court
M/S. Cholayil Pvt. Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner ... on 13 January, 2021
Author: A.M.Badar
Bench: A.M.Badar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 23TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.904 OF 2021(K)
PETITIONER/S:
M/S. CHOLAYIL PVT. LTD.,
(FORMERLY M/S. DORCAS MARKET MAKERS PVT LTD),
NO. 8, J BLOCK, 6TH AVENUE, ANNA NAGAR(E),
CHENNAI - 600012, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE-PRESIDENT,
FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS, SHRI. MATHIVANAN N
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN
SMT.NISHA JOHN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)
SPECIAL CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
IVTH CIRCLE, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680004.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
9TH FLOOR, TAX TOWERS, KILLIPALAM, KARAMANA P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695002.
3 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.904 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of January 2021 Heard both sides.
2. As per the decision of the Appellate Authority in appeal as well as the judgment of this Court, which is reported to be confirmed by the the Hon'ble Apex Court, the 1 st respondent is supposed to refund the excess amount of tax paid by the petitioner together with interest from the date of remittance of the tax to the date of granting the refund for the Assessment Years 1999-2000 to 2004-05. For that purpose, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P7 representation which is reportedly pending before the 1 st respondent.
3. It cannot be disputed that the Hon'ble Apex Court has already rejected the challenge to the order directing refund of the excess tax amount. The said judgment is placed on record at Ext.P3 by the petitioner.
4. In this view of the matter, though the learned Government Pleader argued that the Department is intending to file curative petition, I am of the considered opinion that the law should take its own course and therefore, the 1st respondent is directed to decide Ext.P7 representation, in accordance with law WP(C).No.904 OF 2021 3 and complying the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, expeditiously, and in any case, within three months from the date of this judgment. All consequential steps for refund of the excess sales tax paid by the petitioner should be completed within a period of three months.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
A.M.BADAR
ajt JUDGE
WP(C).No.904 OF 2021 4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
28.07.2016 IN S.T.REV.NO.39/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN SLP(CIVL) NO.18769/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 22.10.2019 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.06.2020 IN RP NO.3978 OF 2020 IN SLP NO.18769 OF 2019 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06.02.2020 SENT BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08.07.2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 2.09.2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF PROVISIONAL WORKING SHEET OF EXCESS TAX PAID BY THE PETITIONER DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2004-05.