M/S Sanjeev Jain & Co. vs. State Of Punjab And Ors
Held
The Court did not decide the merits of the petitioner's claim for refund or interest. Instead, it disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent No.3 to take a decision on the petitioner's applications dated 23.6.2017 and 9.4.2018. This decision was to be made in accordance with the law, by passing a speaking order, and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court explicitly stated that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The operative direction was for respondent No.3 to decide the pending applications within two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sanjeev Jain and Co., engaged in the resale of iron and steel, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to release its refund along with interest. The petitioner claimed an excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the period 1.1.2017 to 31.3.2017, as per its return for the year ending 31.3.2017. It applied for a refund on 23.6.2017, but no refund was granted. Subsequently, on 9.4.2018, the petitioner made another application to respondent No.3 for the refund and interest, but received no response. The present writ petition was filed due to the lack of action on these applications.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the period 1.1.2017 to 31.3.2017, and consequently, to interest thereon, under the relevant provisions of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (or its successor legislation, though not explicitly named in the judgment). The petitioner argued that it had an excess ITC as per its return and had duly applied for the refund on two occasions, but the respondent authorities had failed to take any action. The petitioner contended that the inaction amounted to a denial of its statutory right to claim the refund and interest. The revenue or State did not present any arguments as the matter was disposed of at an early stage without expressing any opinion on the merits.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CWP-14576-2018 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14576-2018 Date of Decision: 31.5.2018 M/s Sanjeev Jain and Co., Jalandhar Cantt. ....Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA PRESENT: Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ACJ.
In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release its refund along with interest.
The petitioner is engaged in the business of resale of iron and steel. As per the return for the year ending 31.3.2017, there was an excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) and, therefore, the petitioner was entitled for the refund. The petitioner had applied on VAT-29 on 23.6.2017 (Annexure P- 1) for refund for the period 1.1.2017 to 31.3.2017. However, no refund was made to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner moved the application dated 9.4.2018 (Annexure P-2) to respondent No.3 for grant of refund along with interest, but no response has been
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 Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.