ABB India Ltd v. The Commissioner Trade Taxes & Anr

Delhi High Court · 09 May 2011 · 2017:DHC:8158-DB
S. Muralidhar; Chander Shekhar
W.P.(C)2695/2017 & W.P.(C)2696/2017
2017:DHC:8158-DB
tax petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that interest on tax refund must be calculated from the date of the refund claim, not from the dismissal of the tax authority's appeal, and directed payment of the differential interest to ABB India Limited.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C)2695/2017
ABB INDIA LTD Petitioner
Through: Mr.R.Jawahar lal with Mr.Siddharth Bawa and Mr.Shyamal Anand,Advocates.
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER TRADE TAXES& ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing counsel along with Mr.Nitya Nand and Mr.Manoj, VATO and Mr. Amit Sharma.
AND
W.P.(C)2696/2017
ABB INDIA LTD Petitioner
Through: Mr. R. Jawahar lal with Mr. Siddharth Bawa and Mr.Shyamal Anand,Advocates.
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER TRADE TAXES& ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing counsel along with Mr.Nitya Nand and Mr.Manoj, VATO and Mr. Amit Sharma.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
09.05.2017
ORDER

1. These writ petitions by ABB India Limited seek directions for refund of W.P(C)Nos.2695/2017&2696/2017 Page[1] of[3] 2017:DHC:8158-DB the amounts deposited with the Respondent,Department ofTrade & Taxes (DT&T),Government ofNCT ofDelhi('GNCTD')for the two Assessment Years ('AYs'). Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2695 of 2017 pertains to the refunds due for AY 2006-06 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2696 of 2017 pertains to the refunds due for AY 2006-07.

2. As far as AY 2005-06 is concerned,the Petitioner made total pre-deposit ofRs.2,80,99,102 on various dates between 27* July 2009 and 29* August 2012 where as for AY 2006-07 the Petitioner made total pre-deposit Rs. 1,20,67,555 between 22"''March 2011 and 29* August2012.

3. The Petitioner succeeded before this Court and demonstrated the demand created by the DT&T for both the AYs in question were unsustainable in law. That decision was delivered by this Court on 28* September 2012 in ABB Limited v. Commissioner,Delhi VAT194(2012)DLT97(DB).The DT&T filed Special Leave Petitions(SLPs)in the Supreme Court.The said SLPs were dismissed on 5 April 2016.

4. On 30* April 2013the Petitioner addressed two letters ofthe same date to the DT&T requesting for refund ofthe amounts deposited by ittogether with interest. Along with these letters, the Petitioner also deposited DVAT Forms-21 with the DT&T.

5. The present controversy is about the shortfall of interest in the refunds made by the DT&T to the Petitioner. In terms of the calculation of the Petitioner, for both the AYs 2005-06 and 2006-07,the total amount due as refund,i.e., principal amount plus interest works out at Rs.3,72,76,056(for W.P(C)Nos.2695/2017& 2696/2017 Page2of[3] k'- AY 2005-06)and Rs. 1,56,86,154(for AY 2006-07). On the other hand,the amount refunded to the Petitioner by the DT&T on 29th April 2017 for the AY 2005-06 is Rs.2,98,72,491 and for AY 2006-07 it is Rs. 1,28,29,299.

6. The difference in the calculation is because the DT&T has worked out the interest only from 5th April 2016 i.e.the date ofthe dismissal ofits SLPs by the Supreme Court.

7. After some arguments,both sides have agreed that interest should be paid on the refund amounts due from the date of the making of the claim for refund i.e.30'^ April2013.

8. It is accordingly directed that the interest due to the Petitioner for both AYs will be re-worked by the DT&T on the above basis i.e. for the period from 30^^ April 2013 upto 29th April 2017 and the differential amount in respect ofboth the AYs will be paid by the DT&T to the Petitioner not later than 30^ June 2017.

9. The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. In the event of noncompliance with the above directions, it would be open to the Petitioner to seek appropriate remedies in accordance with law.

S.MURALIDHAR,J GRANDERSHEKHAR,J MAY 09,2011/Rm W.P(C)Nos.2695/2017&2696/2017 PageJ of[3]