Frick India Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Judgment

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ petition (C) No. 1235 of 1986. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Harish N. Salve Ashok Sen, Ravider Narain, Ms.·Amrita Mitra, D.N. Misra, for JBD & Co., Ms. Meenakshi Grover, Ms. Poonarn Madan, Krishna Kumar, Bhaskar Raj Pradhan for Khaitan & Co., A.P. Dhamija, S. Atreya, N.D.B. Raju, S.K. Jain, Ms. Nisha Bagchi, Ms Ayes~a Khatri, Ms. Indu Malhotra, Ms. Kusum Chaudhary and Aruneshwar Gupta for the appearing parties. · FRICKINDIALTD. v. STATEOFHARYANA[AHMADl,l.] The Judgment of the Court was delivered by AHMADI, J. In view of the decision rendered by the Constitution Benchin/.K Synthetics Ltd v. The Commercial Taxes Officer(CivilAppeal Nos. 3414-16/82, decided on May 9, 1994), since the relevant provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act are analogous to those of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, this plllitiqn must also succeed. We, therefore, allow this B petition and direct that the amount of interest levied and collected from the petitioners under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act shall be refunded to the petitioners within three months from today with interest at 12% per annum from the date of actual recovery till refund. There will, however, be no order as to costs in the facts C and circumstances of the case. CMP will also stand disposed of. R.P. Petition allowed.