TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 135
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Purchase tax i.e. sales tax paid by the petitioner on purchase of raw materials by it from M/s Tata Motors Limited. Other prayers have been made for payment of interest upon the refund amount and for declaration that petitioner's right to claim refund of Purchase tax is not dependent upon issuance of Excess Demand Notice under Section 42 of the Bihar Finances Act, 1981 (as adopted by the State of Jharkhand). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners in all the aforesaid writ petitions have submitted that main lead matter has been treated as W.P. (T) No. 1908 of 2013 because the points raised in rest of the petitions are similar, but, they are writ petitions of different years, except this, there is no other difference, therefore, W.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se tax may be refunded by this Court by issuing necessary writ of Mandamus. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that the applications of the writ petitioner have been preferred for different years, which is at Annexures8 and 9 and similar are the applications in other writ petitions which are annexed. The State has also replied the same that there are certain documents which are required before finalizing the applications for refund of the purchase tax i.e. sales tax paid by the petitioner upon the raw materials purchased by it. One of such letter is at Annexure13 to the W.P. (T) No. 1908 of 2013 and similar are the replies annexed in other writ petitions. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respondent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to decide the refund applications within stipulated time, in accordance with law. 5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that it is the case of the petitioner that they have purchased tax i.e. sales tax on purchase of raw materials to the respondent State, thereafter, several litigations have been taken place between the parties. Counsel has reiterated upon several decisions as stated hereinabove and has submitted that the petitioner is entitled to refund of purchase tax for which the petitioner has preferred applications for refund based upon the Bihar Industrial Policy, 1995 as the exemption was granted by the said policy for 8 years to the new industrial un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision in the Special Leave Petition which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 24thth March, 2006 reported in (2006) 4 SCC 57. The State preferred interlocutory application for clarification about additional tax and surcharge and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that such controversy was never raised by the State. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application to Tata Motors Limited for refund of the purchase tax dated 26thth July, 2010 and Tata Motors Limited informed the petitioner that it has already deposited the amount of purchase tax before the Government and, hence, they can claim refund directly from the State Government. The communication of Tata Motors is dated 27thth July, 2010. 8. In view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), who is respondent no. 2. It appears that the writ petitions have been preferred against the inaction on the part of the State for deciding the refund applications. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the claim of the petitioner is so crystal clear that there is no option with the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), but to pass order in favour of the petitioner and as he is not passing the order of refund and as he is not refunding the money, these writ petitions have been preferred. Thus, it appears that the matters are pending before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration) and the Government has also filed an affidavit in this writ pet....