Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after retrospective validation of the assessment by the amending Act, the Commercial Tax Officer could demand repayment of the amount refunded to the assessee without first rectifying the assessment under the relevant rule.
Analysis: The assessment was retrospectively validated by the amending Act, and the refund earlier made was not a statutory refund under the principal Act but a refund made in obedience to the court's order setting aside part of the assessment. Section 34 validated assessments made under the principal Act notwithstanding any court order, but it did not validate refunds made because of such judicial directions. Once the assessment stood validated, the tax refunded remained tax properly payable, and the liability to repay it flowed directly from the retrospective validation. A rectification under the rule governing assessment corrections was unnecessary because the assessment itself, as validated, continued to sustain the tax demand.
Conclusion: The demand for repayment was valid, and the assessee's challenge failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessment is retrospectively validated by legislation, repayment of tax earlier refunded pursuant to a court order can be demanded without rectification of the assessment if the validated assessment itself continues to authorize the tax.