KHIVRAJ MOTORS LIMITED Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. Murugesan,J.

(2.) THESE appeals challenge the common order passed in the writ petitions whereby all the writ petitions were dismissed by order dated 16.04.2004.

(3.) INSOFAR as the entitlement of the provision of Section 4 relating to the reduction in tax and Section 11 relating to the refund, we may refer to our judgment in W.A.Nos.546 to 548 of 2006 (The Commercial Tax Officer v. M/s.Coimbatore Auto Garage (P) Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director), dated 20.01.2010. In that case, we had an occasion to consider a similar claim of a dealer in automobiles and spare parts, who had paid 13% entry tax and 11% and 12% sales tax respectively for the assessment years 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 under the Local Act and held that whatever be the excess amount paid by the assessee by way of entry tax, it should be reduced and the difference, if any, shall be refunded. In that judgment, in fact, we followed the Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Ganesh Automobiles, (2004) 134 STC 272, wherein this Court had held that whenever excess tax was paid by way of entry tax, it could be adjusted by the assessee while paying the sales tax to the extent of the excess amount paid. As far as the factual aspect of the present case is concerned, the appellant, who is also a dealer in automobiles has in fact paid 13% entry tax and 8% and 11% sales tax under the Local Act and by such payments, the appellant has paid excess tax and therefore, the applicability of the provisions of Sections 4 and 11 of the Entry Tax Act cannot be disputed.