Case Law Details
Syngenta Crop Protection Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
The recent judgment by the Madras High Court in the case of Syngenta Crop Protection Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) has significant implications for taxpayers. The court addressed the calculation of interest under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax (TNVAT) Act, 2006, compared to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax (TN GST) Act, 1959.
The petitioner challenged an order dated 09.04.2019, seeking interest payment at 12% per annum on a sum of Rs.6,45,39,516/- for assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-2001. The court allowed the writ petition on 06.07.2022, directing payment of interest. However, the petitioner contested the interest calculation method used in the intimation dated 25.01.2023.
Firstly, the petitioner argued that interest was calculated under the TNVAT Act, 2006, rather than the TN GST Act, 1959, leading to discrepancies. Secondly, the petitioner disagreed with the computation start date, advocating for interest payment from 29.10.2004, not 13.10.2014 as indicated in the intimation.
Furthermore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 13.02.2023 to the Assistant Commissioner, addressing these grievances. However, as of the court’s ruling, this representation remained unresolved.
In response, the learned Additional Government Pleader assured the court that the representation would be duly considered and disposed of within six weeks.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 09.04.2019 and seeking a direction for the payment of interest at 12% per annum on the sum of Rs.6,45,39,516/- pertaining to assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-2001. Such writ petition was allowed by order dated 06.07.2022 by directing payment of interest. Pursuant thereto, an intimation dated 25.01.2023 was issued. The petitioner is aggrieved by such intimation on two counts.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that interest was calculated in the intimation as per the interest rate prescribed in the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 instead of applying the interest rate prescribed in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The second ground on which the intimation is challenged is that interest was computed with effect from 13.10.2014, whereas the petitioner contends that interest should be paid from 29.10.2004. Learned senior counsel also points out that a representation dated 13.02.2023 was submitted to the Assistant Commissioner with regard to the above grievances and that such representation has not been disposed of until date.
3. Mr. C. Harsha Raj, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent. He submits that the petitioner’s representation would be considered and disposed of within six weeks.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission of learned Additional Government Pleader, W.P.No.8823 of 2024 is disposed of by directing the respondent to consider and dispose of the representation dated 13.02.2023 after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this year. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
Author Bio
