IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 16706 of 2009 Date of Decision: November 3, 2009 R. Woolways (India) Pvt. Ltd. …Appellant Versus Union of India and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant petition prays for issuance of direction to the respondents to pay interest on the refund amount from the date when bank guarantee was en-cashed i.e. 23.10.1996 instead of the date of the order of refund. It is appropriate to mention that the appeal of the petitioner by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, was decided on 23.3.2006 and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority i.e. Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Mobile Wing, Patiala. The Assistant Commissioner vide his order dated 15.4.2009 (P-11) found that no sales tax could be levied as the goods were meant for export and the detaining officer who had imposed penalty did not find any serious discrepancy in the documents produced by the incharge of the goods. He further opines that the grounds for detention of the goods were either technical in nature or beyond the scope of Section 14-B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity, the Act’). He further C.W.P. No. 16706 of 2009 concludes that no evasion of tax under the Act could be established. Accordingly, he deleted the imposition of penalty and dropped the proceedings. He further directed that the amount of penalty deposited by the petitioner be refunded to him in accordance with law. Accordingly, the interest voucher in statutory Form S.T.-XVII-A was issued on 29.5.2009 (P-13) and the petitioner was given the refund as per the provisions of Section 12 Explanation (3) of the Act, which reads thus:- “Where any amount required to be refunded by the Assessing Authority to any person by virtue of an order issued under this Act is not refunded to him within 90 days of the date of the order, the dealer shall be entitled to get simple interest on such amount @ 1% per month from the date immediately following the date of expiry of the said period for a period of one month and there after @ 1.5% per month till the refund is made.” There is no dispute that the refund has been made in accordance with the aforesaid provision by calculating interest @ 1% for the first month after the period of 90 days and thereafter @ 1½ % till the date of payment. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner we find no violation in calculation of interest, which has been admittedly paid to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Explanation (3) below Section 12 of the Act. It is further pertinent to notice that there is no attack on the constitutional validity of the aforesaid provision. In view of the above, the writ petition lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) November 3, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2