2023 (1) TMI 1181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s case that since there is no dispute that it was entitled to a refund of the duty deposited, it is also entitled to interest as specified under Section 30(4) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (hereafter 'the Act'). 3. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are as under: 3.1 The original assessment in respect of sales tax liability of the petitioner was framed on 31.08.1999. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said assessment order before the First Appellate Authority. The said appeal was entertained subject to the petitioner making a pre-deposit of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. The petitioner complied with the said condition and deposited the said sum on or before 09.03.2000. 3.2 The petitioner prevailed before the First Appellate Authorit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... well as interest thereon. The petitioner followed up the said application with a reminder dated 26.10.2020, seeking refund of the said amount along with interest. 3.6 Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents to process the request for refund, the petitioner filed a petition before this Court [being W.P.(C) No.8726/2020 captioned M/s Jiwand Singh & Sons v. Commissioner Trade & Taxes & Anr.]. The said petition was disposed of by a judgment dated 06.11.2020 with a direction to the respondents to decide the petitioner's application for refund of the amount, along with interest in accordance with law. 3.7 The petitioner communicated the said order to the concerned authorities and, thereafter, also filed an application requesti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he event the petitioner's contention is accepted, that the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was deposited only to avail the right to prefer an appeal, the said amount is required to be refunded forthwith after the petitioner has succeeded in its appeal before the First Appellate Authority, that is, on 12.08.2011. Even if the contentions of the respondents are accepted, that the amount deposited is required to be construed as deposit of tax, the petitioner is entitled to interest on the said amount, in terms of Section 30(4) of the Act, as the same was not refunded within a period of 90 days. 7. Section 30(4) of the Act reads as under: "30. Refund *** *** *** (4) Where an amount required to be refunded by the Commissioner to any person as a r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Notwithstanding, that there is no dispute that the petitioner is entitled to a refund of the amount of Rs.10,00,000/-, the learned counsel for the respondents states that the present petition ought to be rejected on two grounds: first, that the petitioner has an alternate remedy; and second, that the petitioner had not taken any action for a period of eight years after it had filed the relevant form for seeking refund of the tax along with interest. 10. This Court does not find any merit in the aforesaid contentions. It is not necessary that in a case where an alternate remedy exists, the Court must refrain from exercising its jurisdiction. 11. In the instant case the petitioner had pursued the respondents for processing its claim for t....