Indian Oil Corp Ltd ( Marketing Div) v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

ORDER Date : 26-02-2024 Heard Mr. N.N. Dutta, learned counsel for the applicant-writ petitioner and Mr. H. Baruah, learned counsel representing Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department, Assam for all the respondents.

¶2The applicant as the writ petitioner, has preferred the connected writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 91/2024. The instant interlocutory application has been preferred by the applicant-writ petitioner seeking corrections in the Order dated 19.01.2024 passed in W.P.[C] no. 91/2024 whereby notices were issued to the opposite parties-respondents. It has been averred that in the said Order dated 19.01.2024, certain typographical errors have crept in.

¶3In order to appreciate such contentions, the relevant excerpts of the Order dated

19.01.2024 are quoted herein :-

¶2Assail is made to an order dated 08.11.2023, passed by the respondent no. 3, whereby, an application submitted by the petitioner for refund of a sum of Rs. 32,37,77,568/- for the Assessment Year : 1996-97 under the Assam General Sales Tax [AGST] Act, 1993 on account of excess interest adjusted, has been disposed of with a finding that the interest levied for the Assessment Year : 1996-97 was on the delayed payment of tax due to the State as per the statutory provisions contained in the Assam General Sales Tax [AGST] Act, 1993. * * *

¶4It has been contended that since it was observed by the Hon'ble Division Bench that since there was nil demand for the Assessment Year : 1996-97, there could not be a question of payment of interest for such nil demand. It has been contended that the Order dated 11.03.2015 was passed after considering the relevant provisions of the Assam General Sales Tax [AGST] Act, 1993, more particularly Section 22 thereof. As the SLP preferred against the said Order had been dismissed with no interference to Page No. 4/4 the Order dated 11.03.2025, passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, the respondent No. 3 could not assumed any jurisdiction to reach a finding that interest is leviable.

¶4By the interlocutory application, it is averred that the words, 'Assessment Year : 1996-97' appearing in paragraph nos. 2 & 4 above ought to have been 'Assessment Year : 1994-95' and the amount 'Rs. 32,37,77,568/-' appearing in paragraph 2 above ought to have been 'Rs. 26,86,98,295/-'.

¶5I have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant interlocutory application as well as in the writ petition. On going through the same, it becomes evident that the errors are inadvertent typographical errors. In such view of the matter, the instant interlocutory application stands allowed.

¶6It is observed that for all intents and purposes, the words, 'Assessment Year : 1996-97' appearing in paragraph nos. 2 & 4 of the Order dated 19.01.2024 shall be read as 'Assessment Year : 1994-95'. Similarly, the amount appearing in paragraph 2 of the said Order dated 19.01.2024 as 'Rs. 32,37,77,568/-' shall be read as 'Rs. 26,86,98,295/-' for all intents and purposes. This order shall be read as part and parcel of the Order dated 19.01.2024 passed in the connected writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 91/2024.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.o1/4 GAHC010020462024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/286/2024o INDIANoOILoCORPoLTDo(oMARKETINGoDIV)o AoGOVT.oOFoINDIAoENTERPRISEoHAVINGoITSoREGISTEREDoOFFICEo SITUATEDoAToMUMBAIoANDoREGIONALoOFFICEoSITUATEDoATo2,o GARIAHAToROADo(SOUTH),oDHAKURIAoKOLKATA-700068oANDoHAVINGo ONEoOFoITSoSTATEoOFFICEoASoINDIANoOILoAODoSTATEoOFFICE,oNOONMATI GUWAHATI.oTHEoPETITIONERoINoTHEoPRESENToPROCEEDINGSoISoBEINGo REP.oBYo MR.oAoPAZHANI,oDGMo(FINANCE)oOFoTHEoPETITIONERoCOMPANY VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORSo REP.oBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVERNMENToOF ASSAM,oFINANCEo(TAXATION)oDEPARTMENToDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoOFoTAXES oASSAM oKARoBHAVAN oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06 3:THEoASSISTANToCOMMISSIONERoOFoTAXES oGUWAHATIoUNIT-A oKARoBHAVAN oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06 4:SUPERINTENDENToOFoTAXES oGUWAHATIoUNIT-A oKARoBHAVAN oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-0o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oDR.oASHOKoSARAFo Page No. 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM Linked Case : WP(C)/91/2024 INDIAN OIL CORP LTD ( MARKETING DIV) A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT MUMBAI AND REGIONAL OFFICE SITUATED AT 2 GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH) DHAKURIA KOLKATA-700068 AND HAVING ONE OF ITS STATE OFFICE AS INDIAN OIL AOD STATE OFFICE NOONMATI GUWAHATI. THE PETITIONER IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS IS BEING REP. BY MR. A PAZHANI DGM (FINANCE) OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES GUWAHATI UNIT-A KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 4:SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES GUWAHATI UNIT-A KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 Advocate for : DR. ASHOK SARAF Advocate for : SC FINANCE AND TAXATION appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS Page No. 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY