A refund application must be decided within 90 days as mandated by statute, and any undue delay warrants statutory interest for the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:

(i) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction including a writ in the nature of a mandamus, directing the Respondent Authorities to forthwith refund an amount of Rs. 1,47,62,037/- for A.Y. 2011-12 as indicated in the excess demand notice dated 31.8.2020 issued by the Respondent Department itself along with statutory interest under Section 55 of the JHARKHAND VALUE ADDED TAX ACT , 2005, from the date of issuance of excess demand notice.

(ii) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction including a writ in the nature declaration declaring that the deliberate inaction of the Respondent Authorities to decide the refund application of the Petitioner within 90 days from the receipt thereof amounts to violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India.

(iii) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction including a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the letter dated 9.5.2023 (Annexure-9) whereby the Respondents have insisted on satisfaction of outstanding dues of other assessment years before issuing an order of refund, in view of the fact that the JVAT Act does not envisage denial of Refund Application on the ground of existing dues as held by this Hon'ble Court in W.P. (T) No. 4783 of 2022 (M/s. Kirloskar Brothers Limited v. State of Jharkhand & Others) vide order dated 10.5.2023.

(iv) For the issuance of any other and further appropriate writ (s) or direction(s) or order(s) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner.

2. At the outset, it is pertinent mention that during pendency of the instant application, the respondents refunded the principal amount of tax on 29.03.2024 and now the only prayer for which the petitioner has contended is with regard to payment of interest.

3. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings are that on 19.03.2015, the petitioner faced a tax liability of Rs. 12,53,62,383/- during the Assessment Year 2011-12, as determined by a regular Assessment Order under Section 35(6)of the JVAT Act.Thereafter, the Petitioner received a notice of demand (Form-JVAT 300) stating 'NIL' amount is payable, as the Petitioner had already paid Rs. 12,56,00,362/-, and the excess of Rs. 2,37,979/- was to be adjusted against the Central Sales Tax Act 1956.However, being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the Petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 79 of the JVAT Act. The Appellate Authority being satisfied by the Petitioner's case, ordered remand of the case to the Assessing Officer for passing a new Assessment Order in compliance with legal requirements.On remand, the Petitioner's total tax liability, as per the reassessment was reduced to Rs. 11,06,00,346/- from the original assessment order. However, the Petitioner received an excess demand notice dated 31.08.2020 only on 15.12.2022, i.e. after more than two years stating that the excess tax amount paid by the Petitioner amounts to Rs. 1,47,62,037/-, considering their prior payment of Rs. 12,56,00,362/- and an adjustment of Rs. 2,37,979/- under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.The Petitioner after receiving the excess demand notice on15.12.2022 promptly filed an electronic Refund Application within the stipulated period 90 days deadline seeking a refund of Rs. 1,47,62,037/-. Subsequently, the Petitioner, due to a delay in processing the