RAJES KUMAR, J. - (1.) PRESENT two revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') are directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 23rd October, 1999 relating to the assessment years, 1994 -95 and 1995 -96 under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Central Act').
(2.) THE short question involved in the present revisions relates to the refund of the amount. For the assessment year, 1994 -95 and 1995 -90 as against the tax due the excess amount deposited by the applicant was to the extent of Rs. 1,85,264.50 and Rs. 3,73,453/ - respectively. The applicant had claimed refund of the aforesaid amount being the amount in excess of the tax due. Assessing authority refused to refund under Section 29 -A of the Act on the ground that the applicant had realized the aforesaid amount from the customers. Thus, not refundable to the applicant but to the customers under Section 29 -A(3) of the Act. The view of the assessing authority has been upheld in first appeals and by the Tribunal. Heard learned Counsel for the parties,
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant submitted that the provisions of Section 29 -A of the Act is not applicable to the Central Act and, therefore, the excess amount cannot be detained under Section 29 -A (2) of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of the refund has not been made applicable to the Central Act, therefore, the provisions of Section 29 -A (2) is not applicable. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Khemka and Co. (Agencies) Pvt. Ltd v. State of Maharashtra reported in 35 STC 571, Indian Carbon Ltd. etc., v. State of Assam reported in 1998 UPTC 1 and the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Ram Krishna Kulvantrai reported in 37 STC 564. He further submitted that no tax can be levied without the authority of law as contemplated by Article 265 of the Constitution of India.;