SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 8530




GAHC040017882024 2025:GAU-AP:1365

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Writ Petition (Civil) No.608/2024

M/s KEC International Ltd.

Through its authorized representative

Shri Ajeet Kumar Pandey,

General Manager, Taxation

Having its Registered Office at

st

1 Floor, Ceat Mahal, 463,

Dr. Anne Basant Road, Worli, Mumbai,

Pin:400030

……….Petitioner

-Versus-

1. The State of Arunachal Pradesh,

through the Secretary to the Government

of Arunachal Pradesh, Revenue Department,

Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh

2. The Commissioner ,

Tax and Excise, Itanagar,

Arunachal Pradesh

3. The Deputy Commissioner, Tax and Excise, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh

4. The Superintendent, Tax and Excise (BEC)

Bhalukpong District, West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh ………Respondents Advocates for the petitioner : Ms. V. Bhargava, Advocate Advocate for the respondents : Mr. T. Wangmu, Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA Date of hearing : 04.09.2025 Date of judgment : 04.12.2025 JUDGEMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

Heard Ms. V. Bhavgava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I Chowdhury, learned Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh.

2. The writ petitioner is a company incorporated and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, read with the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner’s Company is engaged in the execution of works contracts and erection of High- Tension Transmission Lines and Substations in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner was awarded various projects by the Arunachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and the same were executed under the supervision of Power Greed Corporation of India. The petitioner is represented by the authorize representative in the present proceedings who is authorized by power of attorney executed on 20.08.2024. The activities of the petitioner’s company involved in supply and erection of overhead transmission line substations and allied work for execution of such projects in the area of Tippi Bhalukpong, Tippi, Bhalukpong, West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner holds a TIN Registration bearing TIN no. 12020227165 under the Arunachal Pradesh Goods Tax Act, 2005. Consequently, the petitioner has been continuously filing returns for paying taxes dues under the Arunachal Pradesh Goods Tax Act, 2005.

3. The taxes payable by the petitioner for assessment year 2010-11 to 2014- 15 were duly assessed and the amount of Rs.1,84,59,190/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Four Lac Fifty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Ninety) was found to be refundable to the petitioner for the assessment period of 2013-14 and 2014-15. Upon receipt of the assessment order dated 17.09.2016, the petitioner submitted its claim for the refund payable as per the provision of Rule 47 of the Arunachal Pradesh Goods Tax Act, 2005. The petitioner submitted its claim for refund in the prescribed form, namely, Form FF-09 claiming a refund of Rs.1,84,59,190/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Four Lac Fifty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Ninety). Although the said Form was duly received by the respondent no.4 as far back as on 14.10.2016, the refund claimed by the petitioner along with the interest payable were not released. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 13/2021 and the Coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 29.11.2021 disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondent no. 4, namely, the Superintendent of Tax and Excise, Bhalukpong, District West Kameng, as well as respondent no. 2, namely, the Commissioner of Tax and Excise, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh, to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 07.10.2016 along with Form FF-

09, and to pass a reasoned order by taking into account the requirements under Sections 40 and 44 of the Arunachal Pradesh Goods Tax Rules, 2007. According to the petitioner, the respondent no.2 subsequently refunded the amount of Rs.1,79, 52, 416 (Rupees One Crore Seventy Nine Lac Fifty Two th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top