Just a moment...
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 the applicant was entitled to interest on the refundable amount for delay in refund and whether the refund ought to have been processed in accordance with the prescribed statutory procedure.
Analysis: The amended proviso to sub-rule (4) of rule 181 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 required a Refund Adjustment Order to be sent along with the demand notice. The deviation from that mandatory procedure was held to be unjustified, and the respondents were not permitted to rely on the absence of an express interest provision to deny compensation for the delay caused by non-compliance with the prescribed refund process. Since the applicant was kept out of the money that should have been refunded in time, interest was held to be payable on the refundable amount from the date of the demand notice until payment.
Conclusion: The applicant was held entitled to interest at 1% per month on the refundable amount for the relevant period, and the direction for payment of the refund amount within four weeks was modified accordingly.
Final Conclusion: The decision grants monetary relief to the applicant by recognising a right to interest on delayed refund where the statutory refund procedure was not followed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the prescribed refund procedure is mandatory and delay in refund results from non-compliance with that procedure, the revenue cannot deny interest merely because the statute does not expressly provide for interest in that situation.