Binding effect of prior writ decision barred a refund claim for interest on the same subject matter.

Where the same controversy between the same parties had already been decided in earlier writ proceedings, the prior adjudication bound the parties and governed the later refund claim. The document states that the subsequent writ petition was treated as covered by the earlier High Court decision, so the assessee could not avoid its effect by pointing to the absence of a separate express direction on interest. On that reasoning, the departmental rejection of refund of interest was consistent with the binding effect of the prior decision, and no interference was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund of interest paid under protest was liable to be rejected on the ground that the assessee's case was covered by the earlier High Court decision and whether the assessee could avoid the effect of that decision on the basis of factual distinctions.

Analysis: The appeal turned on the effect of the earlier writ proceedings and the later dismissal of the assessee's writ petition as squarely covered by the prior decision. The order records that the subject matter in both writ petitions was the same and that the earlier decision governed the controversy between the parties. In that situation, the assessee could not contend that the earlier decision had no application merely because the second writ petition did not contain an express separate direction on interest. The departmental rejection of refund was therefore consistent with the binding effect of the earlier adjudication and the same reasoning adopted by the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The refund claim was rightly rejected and the dismissal of the appeal was sustained in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The assessee was bound by the prior High Court determination on the same subject matter, and no interference was warranted with the rejection of refund of interest.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the same controversy between the same parties has already been decided and the later proceeding is expressly treated as covered by that decision, the earlier adjudication binds the parties and bars a contrary claim for relief on the same subject matter.

---