NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

CM-6943-CII-2026

Prayer in this application is for placing on record photocopies of Annexures P-6 to P-8.

The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the photocopies of Annexures P-6 to P-8 are taken on record.

COCP-4847-2024

On 25.9.2025, the following order was passed by this Court :-

“It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that in compliance of the Writ Court order dated 02.8.2024 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-13575- 2012 titled as “Jaswhar Lal vs. State of Punjab and others”, payment of interest has been made to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner had applied for the refund in the year 2010. Accordingly, the principal amount of Rs.3,50,647/- was refunded to the petitioner on 28.1.2013. However, thereafter in pursuance of order dated 02.8.2024, whereby it was directed that interest on the said amount be also paid to the petitioner, the respondents had paid interest from the year 2010 till 28.1.2013 for an amount of Rs.1,84,089/- vide order dated 19.9.2024 (Annexure R-1). It is submitted that thereafter in pursuance to judgment of this Court holding that TDS was also to be refunded to the petitioner for the payment from 11.11.2008 upto 28.1.2013 of Rs.82,403/-, refund of TDS was also made to the petitioner thereby granting total sum of Rs.2,66,493/- towards interest for the above said period.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that however, the payment of interest has not been made as per the Demand Notice dated 25.11.2010 (Annexure P-1) submitted to the respondents as per the table mentioned therein in para 6.

Learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to get instructions in this regard.

Adjourned to 24.02.2026.”

In compliance thereof, reply dated 02.3.2026 by way of affidavit of Ms. Pragati Sethi, Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner-1, Excise and Taxation Officer, Amritsar, on behalf of respondent No.3 has already been filed in the Registry, which is taken on record. Copy thereof is supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondents, at the very outset, refers to the averments made in para 9 of the said reply dated 02.3.2026, which reads as follows :-

“xxx xxx xxx

9. That the contention raised by the petitioner on the basis of the Demand Notice dated 25.11.2010 (Annexure P-1) is legally untenable and is hereby specifically denied, as the said demand notice neither confers any vested right nor can it override the statutory scheme governing refund and interest or the binding directions issued by this Hon'ble Court; it is an admitted position, as recorded in the order dated 25.09.2025, that the principal refund of Rs.3,50,647/- was duly made on 28.01.2013 and that, in compliance with the judgment dated 02.08.2024, interest for the period during which the amount actually remained withheld has already been calculated, sanctioned and paid to the petitioner to the extent of Rs.1,84,089/- vide speaking order dated 19.09.2024, and a further sum of Rs.82,403/-vide speaking order dated 13.12.2024, has also been paid pursuant to subsequent judicial directions, aggregating to Rs.2,66,493/-towards interest; once the principal amount stood refunded in January 2013, no further interest could accrue thereafter in law, as interest under the applicable taxing statutes is compensatory and co-terminus with the period of delay in refund and cannot be claimed beyond the date of actual refund; the judgment dated 02.08.2024 does not direct payment of interest as per the unilateral calculations contained in the demand notice, but mandates payment strictly "as per law", which has been scrupulously complied with by the respondents; therefore, the petitioner's insistence on recalculation of interest on the basis of the demand notice dated 25.11.2010 amounts to an impermissible attempt to enlarge the scope of the judgment and seek interest upon interest, which is neither contemplated under the statute