Refund of protest deposit with interest follows when revisional proceedings lapse without a fresh order within the statutory period.

An amount deposited under protest during revisional proceedings, after the revisional order was set aside and no fresh order was passed within the statutory period, was treated as a pre-deposit rather than tax finally due. The original assessment continued to operate, and the refund provisions applicable to tax payments did not govern the claim. Retention of the money without authority of law was inconsistent with the constitutional bar on unauthorised exaction. The petitioner was entitled to refund of the deposited amount with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the first refund demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amount of Rs. 40,00,000 deposited under protest pending revisional proceedings, after the revisional order had been set aside and no fresh revisional order was passed within the statutory period, was liable to be refunded with interest.

Analysis: The original revisional order having been set aside, the matter stood remanded for fresh consideration, but no fresh order was passed. In such a situation, the original assessment continued to operate, and the amount deposited under protest could not be treated as tax or levy finally due. The statutory provision governing consequential action upon remand required such order to be made within three years. The Court held that the amount retained by the department was only a pre-deposit and that the refund provisions applicable to tax payments did not govern the claim. Retention of the amount without authority of law was inconsistent with the constitutional mandate against unauthorized exaction.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to refund of the deposited amount with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the first refund demand.

---