Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 25,394.27 + interest thereon of Rs. 6602.51 total Rs. 31,996.78 on the allegations that the plaintiff-appellant is a Company registered under the Companies Act and . has its registered office at Calcutta. The plaintiff has a factory at Kankroli. The plaintiff Company carries on business of manufacture of tyres and tubes and import coal for the said purposes. The Municipal Board of Rajsamand realised import duty by way of octroi, tax on the imported coal. Previously tax leviable on the coal was Rs. 5/-per metric tonne, later on the State Govt. by notification dated 30-3-1976 had reduced the octroi duty on the coal w.e.f. 6-5-1976 @ Rs. 1.80 per metric tonne, but somehow in spite of the notification issued by the State Govt. reducing the octroi duty on coal, the Company has paid the octroi duty at the old rate of Rs. 5/-per metric tonne on coal imported for the period Nov., 1976 to Oct., 1977 and the same was also recovered by the defendant-respon- dent Municipal Board. On detection of the mistake, the Company informed the Board about the irregularities committed in deposit and recovery of the octroi duty at the old rate and thereafter of the octroi duty was depo-sited and recovered @ Rs. 1.80 per metric tonne from Nov. 1977. The Company had written to the Municipal Board requesting refund of the amount wrongly paid and recovered by the Municipal Board for the period Nov., 1976 to Oct., 1977. A letter was sent to the Municipal Board dated 7-12-1978, which was received by the Municipal Board on the same day giving the details of the octroi duty of Rs. 25,394.27 paid and recovered in excess by the Municipal Board. On 8-8-1978, a letter was written by the Executive Officer of the Municipal Board, Rajsamand, addressed to the Regional Assistant Director, Local Bodies, Rajasthan 'Udaipur, copy to the Company that in fact an excess of Rupees 25,394.27 was recovered from the Company as octroi duty and on sanction being given by the Regional Assistant Director, Local Bodies Rajasthan, Udaipur, the amount shall be refunded back to the Company. The Municipal Board has not refunded the amount paid and recovered in excess, the plaintiff gave notice under Section 271 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) on 8-3-1978 and thereafter a suit was filed on 18-1-1980.