IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 6939 of 2007(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- HARI BALAKRISHNAN, PROPRIETOR, MAHIMA RUBBER PRODUCTS, EDAMUTTAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.UNNIKRISHNA MENON SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 6939/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DTD.7.3.05. P2. COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.12.10.06. P3. COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DTD.24.11.04. P4. COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DTD.18.3.04. P5. COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.12.10.06. P6. COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.31.10.06. P7. COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DTD.26.1O.04. P8. COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DTD.26.10.04. P9. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.1.9.05. P10. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.1.9.05. P11. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.18.10.05. P12 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.18.10.05. P13. COPY OF THE LETTER TO R1 DTD.23.1.07. P14. COPY OF THE LETTER TO R1 DTD.23.1.07. P15. COPY OF THE SUMMARY STATEMENT OF REFUND DUES. P16. COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER DTD.28.11.05. P17. COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD.25.2.2000. P18. COPY OF THE ORDER OF R2 DTD.2.7.07. P19. COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DTD.21.10.04. P20. COPY OF THE CST ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2000-01. P21 COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD.26.5.03. P22. COPY OF THE CHALAN DTD.16.5.03. P23. COPY OF THE CST ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 2002-03. P24. COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD.6.2.06. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 6939 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act. For the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, the assessments made were modified by the appellate authority, consequent to which, the petitioner was entitled to refund of certain excess amounts paid. That was not refunded. For the year 2003-2004, an amount ` 2675/- was paid in excess for the General Sales Tax assessment and an amount of ` 1,09,258/- was paid in excess for the Central Sales Tax assessment. The petitioner was told that the same would be adjusted against the tax due for the year 2004-2005. When assessment for 2004-2005 was completed, an amount of ` 5,799/- was found to be due for refund under the KGST Act and an amount of ` 62,756/- was found to be due for refund under the Central Sales Tax Act. As per Ext.P1 appellate order for the years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, an amount of ` 47,536/- was refundable to the petitioner. Altogether, according to the petitioner, an amount of ` 4,01,679/- is refundable to the petitioner, which has not been refunded so far. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an additional amount of ` 50,000/- is also due for refund making the total amount of ` 4,51,679/-. The petitioner w.p.c.6939/07 2 submits that despite several requests and reminders, the said amount has not been refunded to the petitioner. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, wherein the claim for refund is not denied. But the stand taken is that after adjustment, as stated in the counter affidavit, the amount for refund was computed as ` 2,06,563/-, from which, an amount of ` 67,582/- has to be adjusted towards tax for the year 2002-2003 with interest. 3. The petitioner would take the stand that the amounts shown in the counter affidavit are wrong. He would submit that several payments made, which are stated to have been given credit to, have not actually been given credit to. It is further submitted that after retaining the money belonging to the petitioner, the State cannot recover interest on the amounts due from the petitioner to the State. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. I do not think that it would be proper for me to decide the question as to what is the exact amount due to the petitioner, which is a question of fact, which has to be ascertained based on the challans regarding payment, adjustment etc. Therefore, I am inclined to direct the 1st respondent to reconsider the quantum of amount to be refunded to the petitioner. However, the admitted amount of ` 1,38,981/- shall be paid to the petitioner within one month from the w.p.c.6939/07 3 date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 1st respondent shall take up the dispute regrading the balance claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. I make it clear that the State cannot recover interest on the assessed amount for the assessment year 2002-2003, since at that relevant time amounts due to the petitioner were actually retained by the State. Therefore, no interest shall be charged on ` 67582/-. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge