AYSHATH HAFEEDA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner participated in an auction conducted under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 (the 'RR Act' for short), for realisation of some tax arrears payable by one Sri.Muhammad Abdul Rahiman, who was an assessee under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (the 'KVAT Act' for short). The petitioner was the successful bidder, and an amount of Rs.1,57,800.00 was paid by the petitioner on 7/3/2013 towards 15% of the total bid amount. The balance Rs.8,94,200.00 was paid on 22/3/2013. Put together, an amount of Rs.10,52,000.00 was admittedly paid by the petitioner. On the petitioner making the payments as above, Ext.P3 gazette publication was issued with reference to the provisions of Sec. 57 of the 'RR Act', as per which, the petitioner herein is declared to have succeeded to the rights of Sri.Muhammad Abdul Rahiman referred to above. It is also to be noticed that the petitioner was, however, not given possession pursuant to Ext.P3. In such circumstances, the petitioner preferred W.P.(C).No.29577 of 2018 before this Court for appropriate reliefs. By Ext.P4 judgment, this Court disposed of the above writ petition, noticing that, Sri.Muhammad Abdul Rahiman, the assessee, had taken up the assessments pursuant to which revenue recovery proceedings were taken, in appeals under the statute, and ultimately by the judgment dtd. 19/3/2019, in O.T. (Rev) Nos.56 and 58 of 2018, the assessments were set aside. This Court also noticed that, with respect to another year (2007-08), the assessment has been already set aside by the Appellate Tribunal under the statute. In such circumstances, this Court noticed that the Authorities under the RR Act is to obtain an opinion as to the further proceedings pursuant to the auction sale conducted as above from the Commercial Taxes Authorities. This Court further found as under;

(2.) Pursuant to the above, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation at Ext.P5 before the 2ndrespondent. The 2ndrespondent, in turn, issued Ext.P6 order dtd. 17/8/2019, noticing that the assessments have been set aside at the instance of the assessee and hence setting aside the sale effected in favour of the petitioner under Sec. 54 of the RR Act. The gazette notification at Ext.P3 is also sought to be withdrawn by issuing a fresh gazette notification in that regard. The petitioner was found to be entitled for the refund of the entire amount paid by her, kept as revenue deposit in the meantime.

(3.) In the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition, pointing out that Ext.P6 only speaks about refund of the principal amount of Rs.10,52,000.00 paid by the petitioner and the proceedings is silent as regards the eligibility for interest on the refund amount as above.