VIBHU BAKHRU, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 15.12.2020, whereby the respondents had declined the petitioner’s claim for interest on the refund amount of ₹10,00,000/-.

2. It is the petitioner’s case that since there is no dispute that it was entitled to a refund of the duty deposited, it is also entitled to interest as specified under Section 30(4) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (hereafter ‘ the Act ’).

3. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are as under:

W.P.(C) 1247/2021 Page 2 of 8

3.1 The original assessment in respect of sales tax liability of the petitioner was framed on 31.08.1999. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said assessment order before the First Appellate Authority. The said appeal was entertained subject to the petitioner making a pre-<br/>

deposit of a sum of ₹10,00,000/-. The petitioner complied with the said condition and deposited the said sum on or before 09.03.2000.

3.2 The petitioner prevailed before the First Appellate Authority and by an order dated 12.08.2011, passed by the said Authority, the assessment order dated 31.08.1999 was set aside. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer (AO) to decide afresh.

3.3 In compliance with the order dated 12.08.2011, the AO completed the assessment on 02.04.2012. The operative part of the said assessment order reads as under:

“……. Assessment of the dealer is framed as under:

Gross Turnover :

5,30,73,573 First point tax-paid sales :

5,13,17,266 Sales of taxfree repair work :

15,495 Sales taxable @5% :

94,067 Sales taxable @7% :

3,14,883 Sales taxable @12% :

13,31,862 Tax assessed :

1,86,569 Tax deposited :

1,86,575 Tax due :

nil The amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Lacs Only) deposited by the dealer in stay in the appeal is refundable to him for which he will file proper application in the prescribed manner within the time period prescribed.”

3.4 In compliance with the directions to make an application for refund of the amount of ₹10,00,000/-, the petitioner made an application W.P.(C) 1247/2021 Page 3 of 8 in Form ST-21 on 18.05.2012. Although, there is no dispute that the petitioner is entitled to a refund of the sum of ₹10,00,000/-, the respondents had failed and neglected to refund the same to the petitioner.

3.5 The petitioner claims that it pursued the concerned authority for the refund but in vain. It once again filed an application dated

14.10.2020, before the Assistant Commissioner, seeking refund of the amount as well as interest thereon. The petitioner followed up the said application with a reminder dated 26.10.2020, seeking refund of the said amount along with interest.

3.6 Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents to process the request for refund, the petitioner filed a petition before this Court [being W.P.(C) No.8726/2020 captioned M/s Jiwand Singh & Sons v. Commissioner Trade & Taxes & Anr. ]. The said petition was disposed of by a judgment dated 06.11.2020 with a direction to the respondents to decide the petitioner’s application for refund of the amount, along with interest in accordance with law.

3.7 The petitioner communicated the said order to the concerned authorities and, thereafter, also filed an application requesting them to process its request for refund along with interest. Finally, respondent no.1 acceded to the said request and passed an order dated 15.12.2020, refunding the principal amount of ₹10,00,000/-, however, the petitioner’s request for interest was not acceded to. This has led to the petitioner filing the present petition. W.P.(C) 1247/2021 Page 4 of 8

4. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the deposit of ₹10,00,000/- could not be considered as deposit of tax; the same was deposited as a pre-condition to exercise the right of appeal. The