IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.4970 of 2009
======================================================
Ram Shankar Singh , son of Late Shiv Narayan Singh, resident of Ashram
Road, P.O. and P.S. Raxaul, District East Champaran
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar , through the Finance Commissioner, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration),
Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Raxaul Circle,
Raxaul, District East Champaran.
5. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of
Bihar.
6. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar.
7. The National Highway Authority, Ministry of Surface Transport,
Govt. of India.
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Samdarshi
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pyush Lal, A.C. to A.A.G. 1
Mr. Rabindra Prayadarshi, A.C. to A.A.G. III
For N.H.A.I. : Mr. Sunil Kumar
Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
14 12-07-2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed
Patna High Court CWJC No.4970 of 2009 (14) dt.12-07-2011
2
by a contractor for redressal of his grievance in respect of refund
of the amount of sale tax paid by him in excess for the period from
1st November 1985 to 18th December 1991.
The petitioner was a works contractor. During the relevant
period, the petitioner had handled certain government projects. Out
of the contractual amount payable to the petitioner, certain amount
was deducted at source by the State Government. On assessment
of the tax liability, the amount deducted at source was larger than
the tax liability of the petitioner. The petitioner was, therefore,
entitled to refund of Rs. 63,764.50. As the aforesaid amount of
refund was not paid to the petitioner, he has filed above C.W.J.C.
No.4970 of 2009 under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Learned advocate Mr. Suraj Samdarshi has appeared for
the petitioner. He has submitted that pending this petition during
the months of November 2009, January 2010 and July 2010 a
sum of Rs. 58102/- has been paid to the petitioner. It is now the
grievance of the petitioner that besides the aforesaid sum of Rs.
58102/- remaining sum of around Rs. 6000/- is yet to be paid. The
petitioner has not been paid the statutory interest for the delay in
refund. The petitioner is still entitled to a refund of around Rs.
6000/- and the statutory interest over the amount of refund @ nine
per cent per annum as envisaged by Section 43 of the Bihar
Patna High Court CWJC No.4970 of 2009 (14) dt.12-07-2011
3
Finance Act, 1981.
Learned advocate Mr. Pyush Lal has appeared for the
respondents. He does not dispute the aforesaid proposition.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, the petition
is allowed. The writ petitioner will be paid the remaining amount
of refund of around Rs. 6000/- and the statutory interest within one
month from today. The amount statutory interest, as envisaged by
Section 43 of the Bihar Finance Act, over the aforesaid amount of
Rs. 58102/- will be paid to the petitioner within two months from
today.
In the event, the respondents fail to make payment of the
amount of refund and interest as directed hereinabove, the entire
amount of refund will carry an additional interest @ six per cent
per annum commencing from the date of this order till the date of
payment.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Basudeo Tiwary/-