Pallava Textiles Private Limited Vs State Tax Officer (ST) (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court didn’t entertain the writ as refund application filed without debiting extent of refund claim amount from Electronic Credit Ledger. Accordingly, writ dismissed as mandatory requirement of filing refund application not complied.
Facts- The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner. The challenge in these writ petitions is to the impugned orders passed by the respondents dated 02.04.2025,05.04.2025 and 07.04.2025 rejecting the refund claims applications claimed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner without debiting the extent of refund claim amount from electronic credit ledgers, has filed the refund applications.
Conclusion- Held that the main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that though they are eligible for refund, the respondents without properly verifying the documents filed by the petitioners have rejected the refund claim applications filed by the petitioners. If that being the case, the petitioners ought to have filed the appeal before the appellate authority challenging the impugned orders. This Court is not inclined to go into the factual issues raised by the petitioners. That apart, without debiting the extent of the refund claim amount from the Electronic Credit Ledger, the petitioners have filed the refund applications. Therefore, the mandatory requirement for filing the refund applications have not been complied with by the petitioner. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain these writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed.
