TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (3) TMI 644
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....959. The brief relevant facts of the case are as follows: (a) By an assessment order dated March 31, 1997, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (Adm) (M-85), Arranger granted refund of Rs. 79,00,000 to the petitioner in respect of the period April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1994. This order was set aside by a suo motu revisional order by the revisional authority by his order dated January 16, 1998. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order in revision, preferred appeal being Appeal No. 18 of 1998 before the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal and by its judgment and order dated June 13, 2003, the Tribunal allowed the petitioner's appeal and confirmed the assessment order. The Tribunal also directed the assessment officer to grant refund to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on be dismissed as the petitioner had an equally efficacious remedy by way of an appeal under section 56 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act. It was contended that the proper remedy for the petitioner was to seek the relief sought in this petition before the Commissioner (Appeals). Reliance was placed upon section 56 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act and it was contended that this section enumerates all the orders which are non-appealable or non-revisable and the impugned order passed by the Commissioner under section 44A was not an order in respect of which an appeal was barred under section 56 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act. The Advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Tin Plate Co. of India Ltd. v. State of Bihar rep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case. On behalf of the Revenue, it is contended that as determined by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Pune and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the petitioner would not be entitled to interest on delayed refund as after the passing of the order by the assessing officer dated March 31, 1997 a show cause notice to revise the said order was issued to the petitioner on September 23, 1999 and ultimately the order of the assessing officer came to be quashed on January 6, 1998. It is further contended that in these circumstances, there was no final refund order in favour of the petitioner till the assessment order was restored by the Tribunal vide its order dated March 30, 2003. After perusing the facts of the case and the concerned pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... excluded for the period for which interest is payable. (2) Where any question arises as to the period to be excluded for the purposes of calculation of interest under the provisions of this section, such question shall be determined by the Commissioner, whose decision shall be final. 44B. Power to withhold refund in certain cases.-(1) Where an order giving rise to a refund is the subject-matter of an appeal or further proceeding or where any other proceeding under this Act is pending, and the authority competent to grant such refund is of the opinion that the grant of the refund is likely to adversely affect the Revenue, such authority may, with the previous approval of the Commissioner, withhold the refund till such time as the C....