- (1.) THE record is put up for orders.
(2.) THIS application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 which is in the nature of a writ application, is at the instance of a transport company and is directed against an order dated June 5, 2000 by which the petitioner's prayer for refund of tax was rejected with a further prayer for refund of Rs. 1,58,374 said to have been collected illegally by the respondents from the petitioners.
(3.) PETITIONER No. 1 is a proprietorship concern, while petitioner No. 2 is the proprietor of the said concern. The petitioners are transporters acting as a common carrier and running business of transporting goods in and outside the State of West Bengal. Thus the petitioners are not dealers within the meaning of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. They are also not a casual trader within the meaning of West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. Their case is that although they were not liable for taxation, yet they used to be intercepted in course of transport of goods outside the State of West Bengal and demanded payment of tax under Section 4C/4D of the Act of 1941. Trucks loaded with goods were detained illegally until tax under Section 4C/4D/11 or 14 is paid. Respondent No.3 or their agent verbally demanded advance tax and on some occasion such demand was made on plain paper. No demand notice was issued before collecting advance tax from the petitioners after keeping the vehicle in detention illegally. In course of such business on January 10, 2000 the manager of the petitioners, namely, Shri Srikanta Jana came to know from Inland Road Service that an order was passed on December 10, 1999 by this Tribunal for refund of advance tax illegally collected from the petitioners by the respondents. On further enquiry the manager came to know from their advocate, Shri Supriya Mukherjee that the petitioners are entitled to get refund of advance taxes. Accordingly, two identical prayers were presented before the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for refund of advance tax collected from the petitioners, but their prayers were rejected on the ground that their relief had become time barred by limitation. Those two orders, according to the petitioners, are illegal and liable to be set aside.;