M/S.Sidharth Chemicals vs. Dy Commissioner Of Sales Tax,Rourkela Ii Circle
Held
The Court directed the department to process the petitioner's refund application. The department must hear the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within a specified timeframe.
Facts
The petitioner sought a mandamus for the refund of excess input tax credit based on an application made in 2009. The department failed to file a reply despite a notice issued in 2016.
Key Issues
Whether the department should be directed to process a long-pending refund application for excess input tax credit.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 24.11.2022
1. The prayer in the present writ petition is for a mandamus to the Opposite Parties to grant the Petitioner refund of excess input tax credit in terms of the Petitioner’s application at Annexure-2. The application itself is dated 30th April, 2009. Despite notice having been issued in the present petition way back on 4th January, 2016 for nearly seven years now, there has been no reply filed by the Department.
In that view of the matter, a direction is issued to the Department to process the Petitioner’s application (Annexure-2) and after hearing the Petitioner on a date to be intimated to the Petitioner at least 10 days in advance, pass an appropriate reasoned order on the sai
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.