TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (2) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against the judgment of the Orissa High Court in Writ Petition No. O.J.C. 13435 of 2000 Reported as Orient Paper Mills v. Sales Tax Officer [2004] 134 STC 128. The writ application was filed by Orient Paper Mills (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee") under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short, "the Constitution") for a direction to the Sales Tax Officer, Sambalapur III Circle, Jharsuguda and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, to refund the sales tax collected along with interest. The Sales Tax Officer (opposite party No. 1) in the writ petition had calculated the interest payable to the assessee at Rs. 31,16,438. According to the assessee the amount payable was Rs. 73,73,424. 3.. Background facts w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee filed a Writ Petition O.J.C. No. 9735 of 1996. By order dated September 17, 1996 taking into account the fact that the assessee had already deposited rupees 50 lakhs pursuant to the directions given in the other writ petition, the High Court directed deposit of a further some of rupees 25 lakhs without prejudice to the claims involved. The payment was to be made by September 23, 1996 which was done. The second appeal was disposed of by the Tribunal remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner. Against the said order the State Government filed an application before the Tribunal seeking a reference to the High Court but the same was rejected as according to it no question of law was involved. After remand, the Assistant Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o direction about the rate at which interest was to be payable, the Commissioner had allowed a reasonable rate of 10 per cent. Reference was made to the amendment of section 14-C that with effect from October 3, 2000, it was submitted, the rate indicated in the provision was to apply though the refund application was made on July 24, 2000. It was submitted that by mistake interest had been granted on the sum of Rs. 25,00,000 though the court had not stipulated grant of any interest in its order dated September 17, 1996. 6.. The High Court was of the view that the use of the expression "the date of formal application" used in the order dated March 11, 1996 made the position clear that the same was with reference to section 14-C of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el appearing for the revenue, has submitted that the High Court has erroneously applied the provisions of section 14-C to the facts of the case. The said provision has no application to the facts of the case. In any event the High Court has not analysed the said provision in the background of other provisions of the Act which in clear terms provided that a claim for refund of the amount cannot be made when there is an order of remand for fresh assessment. Even before the amendment, the expression used was "amounts refundable under section 14". As no amount was refundable before completion of the fresh assessment pursuant to the order of remand, and it had not attained finality the question of granting any interest would not arise. As the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ier writ petition namely, O.J.C. No. 1200 of 1995 was made by the High Court in the exercise of its power under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India wherein while directing the appellants to deposit the amount quantified therein, the High Court also issued a direction to the respondent-State that it should refund the amount with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum in the event of the appellants succeeding in the second appeal. This order is definitely not one made under the provisions of the Act. The respondent-State which took benefit of the said order and retained the amount deposited by the appellant, cannot now be permitted to say when it comes to refund direction issued by the High Court in its order dated March ....