Refund of tax deposited under protest cannot be withheld once liability is finally negated, despite pending SLP.

Where entry tax was found not payable and the amount had been deposited under protest, refund was payable under the statutory refund provision with interest. A prior finding that the liability was not admitted in the returns bound the parties, so the authority could not reopen that issue to deny repayment. Pendency of a separate challenge to the levy did not suspend the refund obligation where entitlement had already been finally determined.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the assessee was entitled to refund of Entry Tax deposited for carbon black feed stock despite the objection that the amount represented admitted tax, and (ii) whether pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court could justify withholding the refund.

Issue (i): whether the assessee was entitled to refund of Entry Tax deposited for carbon black feed stock despite the objection that the amount represented admitted tax.

Analysis: Section 29 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 mandates refund of tax paid in excess of the amount due, with interest, and bars refund only where the tax is admitted in the returns. The Tribunal had already held that carbon black feed stock was not liable to Entry Tax, that the assessee had not admitted the liability in its returns, and that the amount had been deposited under protest. That finding had attained finality between the parties and the respondents could not reopen the same ground to deny refund.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to refund, and the objection based on admitted liability failed.

Issue (ii): whether pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court could justify withholding the refund.

Analysis: The Court noted that the assessee's entitlement had already been finally decided in the proceedings between the parties by the Tribunal and the High Court. The pendency of a separate challenge to the validity of the levy was treated as an academic exercise so far as the assessee was concerned, and it did not suspend the statutory obligation to refund the amount found refundable.

Conclusion: Pendency of the Special Leave Petition did not bar refund.

Final Conclusion: The refusal to refund was unsustainable, the writ petition succeeded, and the assessee was entitled to refund of the deposited amount with interest under the statute.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the competent appellate forum has finally held that no tax was payable and that the amount was deposited under protest, the authority must grant refund under the refund provision, and pendency of a separate challenge to the levy does not justify withholding that refund.

---