IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Indian Railway Construction International Limited (IRCON) is fully owned Government of India undertaking. They are engaged in the construction of railway works. The petitioner herein is a registered dealer, i.e., works contractor on the rolls of the second respondent under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 ("the Sales Tax Act", for brevity). For the assessment years 1997-98, the second respondent completed assessment vide order dated March 30, 2000. It resulted in refund of an amount of Rs. 21,49,319. Even a short period thereafter, on November 17, 2000, the second respondent passed reassessment order under section 14(4) of the Sales Tax Act. Even after such revision, an amount of Rs. 18,45,309 was to be refunded to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the reassessment order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) (hereafter called, "the ADC"), which was allowed on March 20, 2001. However, the first respondent revised the order of the ADC under section 20(1) vide order dated June 12, 2003. The petitioner then filed a special appeal which is pending before this court. Be that as it is, even after the suo motu revision by the first respondent, an amount of Rs. 18,45,309 became refundable. The second respondent accordingly passed a consequential order on September 5, 2003 after providing for tax adjustments for the assessment year 1995-96, notice of final assessment and refund order in form C for an amount of Rs. 17,03,322 informing that an amount of Rs. 17,03,322 is to be refunded in cash to the petitioner.

(2.) Even though form C was prepared, it was not given effect. The petitioner then sent representation for actual refund of the amount as per form C dated September 5, 2003. In response thereto, the second respondent passed impugned proceedings. The refundable amount was forfeited on the ground that any refund would amount to unjust enrichment in favour of the assessee. This order is assailed in the writ petition.

(3.) A counter-affidavit is filed by the second respondent reiterating the contents of the impugned order.