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, where an appellate authority sets aside an assessment and remands the matter to the assessing authority without a specific direction to refund amounts recovered during the pendency of the appeal, the dealer becomes entitled to immediate refund and interest under Section 29 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.
Analysis: Section 29 contemplates refund only of an amount that is first found to be refundable in accordance with the statute. The proviso to sub-section (1) requires such amount to be adjusted against any outstanding liability, and sub-section (2) makes interest payable only when the refundable amount is not returned within the prescribed period after an order of refund, or after receipt of such order from another competent authority or court. The governing expression is not merely that some amount has become excess on remand, but that it has been found to be refundable as a result of adjudication. The earlier conflicting view was resolved by the Supreme Court in Hind Lamps and in the later decision involving the same assessee, which held that refund and interest do not arise merely because an assessment is set aside and remanded without a specific refund direction.
Conclusion: The answer is against the assessee. Refund and interest are not automatically payable on remand unless the amount is specifically found to be refundable in accordance with Section 29.