Refund adjustment under trade tax law requires prior authority determination; dealers cannot self-adjust alleged excess deposits.

Section 29 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 permits adjustment of tax only after the assessing authority has adjudicated that an amount is refundable. A dealer cannot unilaterally treat earlier excess payments as refundable and set them off against later tax liability, because the statutory refund mechanism must be operated by the competent authority under the prescribed rules. Rules 89 and 90 of Chapter XV reinforce that refund and adjustment are authority-driven processes, not matters for self-help by the dealer. The view allowing unilateral adjustment was therefore erroneous.

---

---

Issues: Whether a dealer could unilaterally adjust alleged excess tax deposits from tax payable for later periods under section 29 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: Section 29 permits adjustment only when an amount has been first found to be refundable by the assessing authority, and the authority alone is empowered to make such adjustment while granting refund. The expression "found to be refundable" contemplates an adjudicatory determination, not a unilateral assumption by the dealer that excess payments in earlier years are refundable. The manner of refund is also governed by rules 89 and 90 in Chapter XV of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948, which reinforces that the statutory mechanism is to be operated by the authority and not by the dealer himself.

Conclusion: The dealer could not make self-adjustment of the alleged refundable amounts, and the High Court's view permitting such adjustment was erroneous.

Ratio Decidendi: Adjustment against future tax liability under a refund provision is permissible only after a competent authority has determined the amount to be refundable and the adjustment is made through the statutory refund process.

---