2018 (5) TMI 1614

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... case of time barred deemed assessment. 2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the petition may be noticed. The petitioner company is engaged in the construction and repair of roads having taken work contract/tender from the Government and other public sector undertakings. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act 2003 (in short, the HVAT Act") and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short, "the CST Act") as a works contractor. The petitioner is filing regular returns as prescribed under the HVAT Act. Grievance of the petitioner is on account of illegal withholding refund of tax for a sum of Rs. 30,42,838/- for the assessment year 2009-10, the assessment of whic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion dated 14.5.2015, Annexure P.5, requested respondent No.3 to issue refund for the assessment year 2009-10 on the basis of annual return being a case of deemed assessment. The respondents did not release/issue the refund due to the petitioner for the assessment year in question inspite of the fact that the assessment had already become time barred. The annual return for the assessment year in question was submitted well within time on 25.11.2010. A sum of Rs. 30,42,832/- was claimed as refund on account of excess tax deposited/deducted towards its liability for the said year. Hence the instant petition by the petitioner. 3. Reply by way of affidavit of Excise and Taxation Officer, Panchkula, respondent No.4 has been filed wherein it has ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xure P.2, respondent No.4 passed an ex parte assessment order under Section 15(5) of the HVAT Act raising a demand of Rs. 32,33,710/- as additional tax from the petitioner company. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals). Vide order dated 19.11.2013, Annexure P.3, the appeal was allowed and the case was remanded back to the assessing authority for denovo assessment with a direction to allow the TDS after verification. The assessing authority was directed to decide the case within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. Respondent No.4 did not initiate the assessment proceedings denovo. As per Section 18 of the HVAT Act, the limitation period for ....