Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Hardik Textiles Through Its Prop. Hardik Patel (Gujrat High Court)
Appeal Number : R/Special Civil Application No. 7468 of 2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 22/12/2021
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Hardik Textiles Through Its Prop. Hardik Patel (Gujrat High Court)

It is not in dispute that due to the mistake of the consultant engaged by the petitioner, the amount has been deposited in the wrong account. The bank details are to be entered under RFD-05. The petitioner also did not raise the grievance immediately and made an application with reference to the said issue after nearly three months. The amount which had gone to the wrong account of M/s. Meet Textiles had been refunded on 09.12.2020 by way of DRC-03 under Section 73(5) by way of voluntary payment. The Deputy State Tax Commissioner Circle-16, Surat vide its communications dated 21.01.2021 and 11.02.2021 had requested the Joint Commissioner of State Tax E-governance, Gujarat State to resolve the peculiar issue on hand.

It emerges that second time when the application had been made by the petitioner, the rejection has come as there is a technical glitch. Even by specifying that the refund is being claimed under the head “others” the system has not permitted the amount to be given by way of refund to the petitioner. Undoubtedly, it was a mistake which was committed by the consultant of the petitioner and therefore, the third party namely M/s. Meet Textiles had been benefited where the amount had been deposited.

The amount once again has gone back to the authority by way of DRC-03 on 09.12.2020, hence, the only way out now for availing the legitimate claim of the petitioner is by depositing the amount in his account which he has mentioned.

Let the refund amount be accordingly credited in the bank account of the petitioner having Account No. 00211101004059 with the Mehsana Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, as it is not the fault of the petitioner to be deprived of this amount of refund and the stand on the part of both the counsels of the respondents also being fair, according to them, this is a technical glitch as the system itself does not permit it to happen, therefore, we are constrained to interfere.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031