2001 (8) TMI 1357

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....J.-The sales tax assessment for the year 1989-90 was finalised by the respondent-authority on July 10, 1992.   An amount of Rs. 1,05,832 had become due to the petitioner on account of refund. This amount was not paid to the petitioner. It represented. Having failed to receive a reply, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition. It prays that a writ of man....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e refund of the amount of Rs. 60,874 should have been made immediately on the passing of the order dated July 10, 1992. Since nothing was due from the petitioner on that day, the respondent/authority had to make the refund and the petitioner was not required to exercise any option. Still further, the counsel points out that on receipt of the assessment order the petitioner had made a representatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5,832 was due to the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 1989-90. The department had automatically made the adjustment for Rs. 44,938. Thereafter the amount of Rs. 60,874 should have been refunded to the petitioner immediately.   6.. Ms. Palika Monga contends that the petitioner had failed to exercise option in terms of rule 35 of the Rules. 7.. A perusal of rule 35 shows that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re is some amount due from it. In a case where nothing is due, the question of adjustment or option cannot arise. In the very nature of things, the refund must follow. In the present case, the authority has failed to give a direction in terms of rule 35. Resultantly, the petitioner is entitled to the payment of interest. 9.. Another fact which deserves notice is that in paragraph 6 of the petit....