https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293607 A deposit taken only as a condition for issuance of a road permit under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was treated as refundable security, not tax. The refund machinery for excess tax paid by a dealer did not control such a deposit, and the absence of a prescribed refund form could not defeat the claim; a simple application was sufficient. A notice and refusal of refund also failed because there was no factual basis to show taxable sale or purchase of the imported goods within the State. The refund claim was therefore required to be reconsidered as a claim for return of security. en-us Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:02:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293607 A deposit taken only as a condition for issuance of a road permit under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was treated as refundable security, not tax. The refund machinery for excess tax paid by a dealer did not control such a deposit, and the absence of a prescribed refund form could not defeat the claim; a simple application was sufficient. A notice and refusal of refund also failed because there was no factual basis to show taxable sale or purchase of the imported goods within the State. The refund claim was therefore required to be reconsidered as a claim for return of security. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293607