TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court: Limit Commissioner's Role to Quantification of Refund Amount</h1> <h3>M/s. DLF Limited Versus The State of Haryana and Another</h3> M/s. DLF Limited Versus The State of Haryana and Another - TMI Issues:1. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner to reject the refund and review the assessment.2. Validity of the order of the Haryana Tax Tribunal.Analysis:Issue 1: Jurisdiction of the Commissioner to reject the refund and review the assessmentThe appellant, a company engaged in construction activities, sought a refund of excess tax paid on rental income of machinery and equipment rented out to another company. The Assessing Authority initially approved the refund based on the situs of the agreement outside Haryana. However, the Commissioner declined to approve the refund exceeding Rs. 10 lakhs, citing unjust enrichment. The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Commissioner under Rule 36 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules and Section 43 of the Act. Referring to precedent, the Court held that the higher authorities cannot set aside the assessment order of the Assessing Authority while determining the refund amount. The Court relied on the Division Bench's decision in Raghbar Dass Hukam Chand vs. State of Haryana, affirming that the refund must follow the order of the Assessing Authority, and the Commissioner's role is limited to quantifying the refund amount. Thus, the Commissioner's rejection of the refund was deemed unjustified, and the appellant was entitled to the refund as per the initial assessment order.Issue 2: Validity of the order of the Haryana Tax TribunalThe Haryana Tax Tribunal had upheld the Commissioner's decision to refuse the refund based on the principle of unjust enrichment. However, the High Court found the Tribunal's order unsustainable in light of the established legal principle that the refund determination should align with the Assessing Authority's assessment order. Citing previous judgments, including Jai Bharat Gum and Chemicals Ltd. vs. State of Haryana, the Court reiterated that the Tribunal's decision was flawed as it deviated from the legal framework governing refund approvals. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, emphasizing their entitlement to the refund as per the initial assessment order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
