NAOLEKAR, J. - (1.) THE petitioner is an Assessee for Commercial Taxes under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (in short hereinafter referred to as the Act ). By order dated 21. 3. 1994, the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer (Anti-evasion), Udaipur has directed refund of Rs. 1,54,086. 00/ -. THEreafter, the petitioner moved an application under Section 17 of the Act for interest under Section 23 (2) of the Act. the Petitioner's application was decided by order dated 13. 7. 94 and the petitioner was given interest @ 12% per annum from 9. 8. 90 to 31. 3. 92 and thereafter @ 15% from 1. 4. 92. It has also been held that the interest shall be calculated only if the amount is in deposited for a period of one year.
(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that he has been granted the interest from 9. 8. 90 on the basis of the Circular No. 868-A : CIT/circular F. 120 (M) Tax/cct, dated 4. 2. 92 (Annexure 3), and Circular No. 850-E : Circular F. 120 (Misc.) Tax/cct/refund 91,500, dated 30. 4. 91 (Annexure 4 ). The Circulars are not in conformity with the provisions of the Act and particularly, Section 23 (2) of the Act, thus, cannot be given effect to. The grant of interest from 9. 8. 90 is contrary to the provisions of Section 23 (2) of the Act and petitioner is entitled for the interest from the date of the deposit till the refund. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the two circulars i. e. Annexures 3 and 4, issued by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department and order dated 13. 7. 94 (Annexure 2) passed by Commercial Taxes Officer (Anti-evasion), Commercial Taxes Department, Udaipur. Counsel for the respondents argued that on true constructions of sub-section (2) of Section 23, the interest is payable only from 9. 8. 90, after the substitution of sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act as prior to 9. 8. 90, there was no provisions to allow interest and that the interest shall be calculated for any period not less than 12 months. Section 23 of the Act reads as under: - "23. Refunds (1) - The Assessing authority shall, in the prescribed manner refund to a dealer any amount of tax paid by such dealer in excess of the amount due from him under this Act, either by cash payment or by deduction of such excess from the amount of tax due in respect of any other period. " (2) An amount refundable to a dealer under this Act shall carry interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum with effect from the date of deposit of the amount to be refunded. Sub-section (2) was substituted by Act 17 of 1990 w. e. f. 9. 8. 90. Under Section 23, the Assessing Authority is authorised to make an order of refund to a dealer, any amount of tax paid, by such dealer in excess of the amount due from him under the Act, in the prescribed manner. Sub-section (2) of Section 23 provides that the amount refunded to a dealer under the Act shall carry interest @ 12% per annum with effect from the date of deposit of the amount. The rate of interest has been enhanced from 12% to 15% under the Act 6 of 1992 w. e. f. 1. 4. 1992. The main controversy is centered around sub-section (2) of Section 23. The golden rule of construction is that the words of the statute must prima-facie be given their ordinary meaning. Natural and ordinary meaning of the words should not be departed from unless it is shown that in the legal context, or in the object of the statute in which they occure, or in the circumstances they are used, requires a different meaning. There is a presumption that the words are used in an Act correctly and exactly and not loosely and in-exactly. As per the words used in sub-section (2), the refund amount shall carry interest @ 12% / 15 % pre annum and the interest shall be with effect from the date of the deposit of the amount to be refunded. The words used in sub-section (2) of Section 23 "shall carry interest @ 12% per annum" clearly prescribes a rate at which the interest shall be paid on the refund amount and not the period for which the interest shall be paid. The period for which the interest shall be paid, is provided in latter part of the Section by the words "with effect from the date of deposit of the amount to be refunded. " Plain and simple meaning is that the interest is payable from the date of the deposit. There is nothing in the legal context of object of the Sales Tax Act, to read it from the date of the substitution of sub-section (2) of Section 23. The refund is made of the amount of tax, which has been deposited by the dealer in excess of his tax liability, that is, refund of the amount which was not required to be paid or deposited by the dealer under the Act. Naturally, if the amount is in deposit with the Sales Tax Department and is returned, it will carry interest, if provided under the Act, and the interest will be calculated from the date of deposit, which is also a ordinary trade practise. If the interest is to be paid from some other dale and not from the date of deposit, that will be deviation from the ordinary trade practise and it is for the respondent to establish special circumstances or in the legal context, the different meaning can be attributed to the words "from the date of deposit", then its plain and simple meaning.
(3.) ON plain reading of sub-section (2) of Section 23, is manifest that the interest shall be paid from the date of the deposit of the amount till it is refunded and a rate of interest shall be calculated on the deposit at the rate of 12% or 15%, as the case may be irrespective of the period for which the amount remains in deposit. The circulars issued vide Annexures 3 and 4 are not in accordance with law, that is, not in conformity of sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act and as such are not enforceable. The respondent no. 2 has committed an error while directing the interest to be calculated from 9. 8. 90 and only for a full period of one year. The order dated 13. 7. 94 (Annexure 2) and the Circulars dated 4. 2. 92 (Annexure 3), and dated 30. 4. 91 (Annexure 4), are not in accordance with law, are hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the respondent no. 2 for fresh decision in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to remain present before the respondent No. 2, Commercial Taxes Officer (Anti-evasion), Udaipur on 15. 1. 1995. There shall be no order as to costs. . ;