Tribunal declares provision denying tax refunds unconstitutional under Article 14

The Tribunal declared sub-section (4) of section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002 unconstitutional under article 14 of the Constitution. The provision, which denied refunds of excess amounts paid by dealers, was found to violate the equality principle as it led to unfair treatment and lacked an intelligible differentia in classification. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the petitioners, emphasizing the unconstitutional nature of the contested sub-section.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to the constitutionality of sub-section (4) of section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002 under article 14 of the Constitution.

Detailed Analysis:
The petitioners contended that the Samadhan Scheme introduced by the Government of Tamil Nadu under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002, imposed unfair conditions. They argued that under section 6(4) of the Samadhan Scheme, dealers who had paid more than 50% of the disputed tax were denied refunds of the excess amount paid, leading to inequality among dealers. The petitioners claimed that this classification violated the equality principle enshrined in article 14 of the Constitution, and they sought a declaration that sub-section (4) of section 6 was arbitrary and unconstitutional.

The Revenue's Senior Standing Counsel countered by stating that the Samadhan Scheme was voluntary, and dealers who opted for it accepted its provisions, including section 6(4). The Counsel argued that the provision was valid in law, and there was no violation of article 14 of the Constitution.

Upon review of the arguments, the Tribunal examined the provisions of the Samadhan Scheme. Section 6 outlined the determination of the amount payable by applicants, with section 6(4) specifically stating that excess amounts paid would not be refunded. Section 7 detailed the rates for determining the amount payable based on the type of dispute. The Tribunal noted that the scheme applied the same rate for all eligible dealers but made distinctions between those who had not paid any amount and those who had paid in excess.

The Tribunal found that the provision in section 6(4) contradicted the spirit of section 6(1) by denying refunds of excess amounts paid, leading to unfair treatment of dealers. It concluded that the lack of intelligible differentia in the classification of payments rendered section 6(4) violative of article 14 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Tribunal declared sub-section (4) of section 6 as unconstitutional and allowed the original petitions.

In summary, the judgment focused on the challenge to the constitutionality of sub-section (4) of section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Disputes) Act, 2002 under article 14 of the Constitution. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of the Samadhan Scheme, considered the arguments presented by both parties, and ultimately ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring the contested sub-section as violative of the constitutional right to equality.

---