Ram Kripal Singh Construction Pvt. Limited v. The State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department (now State Tax Department), Jharkhand, Ranchi

What happened

The petitioner sought a writ directing the respondents to process its refund application of 27 May 2017 for the 2014-15 assessment order and to refund the admitted excess tax of ₹6,71,54,829, with interest under section 55 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The Revenue's counsel said that refunds were being processed but, because the amount was large, the Additional Commissioner's involvement was needed, whose post was vacant, while the Secretary had been deputed as an observer for election duty in West Bengal, so refunds could not presently be made.

Questions before the court

• Can the Revenue delay a refund of admitted excess tax by citing a vacant post or official duty elsewhere, and who bears the interest for the delay?

Why the court ruled this way

The Court was surprised by the Revenue's attitude and said the facts were quite gross: the business of the department cannot come to a halt because a post is vacant or an official is on deputation, as others would hold charge, and delayed refunds invariably accrue interest that is paid from taxpayers' money (paragraphs 8 and 10). Officials, as trustees, cannot delay such matters simply because there is no mechanism to make them answerable or to note such instances in assessing their service performance (paragraph 9). Section 55 of the Act gives a registered dealer simple interest at six per cent a year for the period after ninety days (paragraph 20).

Controlling point

The refund of admitted excess tax must be made with interest at 6% per annum, and the Commissioner is made personally responsible for any further delay.

Order and next steps

The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was directed to ensure that the petitioner is refunded ₹6,71,54,829 with interest at 6% per annum commencing after 90 days of the petitioner's first refund application, computed and paid on or before 5 May 2026 without excuses. If it is not paid by then, the interest for the further period is to be paid personally by the Commissioner and deducted from salary. The order was to be brought to the notice of the Principal Accountant General and the Chief Secretary of Jharkhand to prevent recurrence, and the Registry was to place the matter high on board on 7 May 2026 for a compliance affidavit.

Practical implications

A dealer with an admitted refund pending for years can file a writ citing this order and section 55 of the Jharkhand VAT Act for interest; the Court shows willingness to fix time limits and personal accountability.

Limits of this ruling

• The order was passed on the particular facts, including an admitted refund pending since 2017; it directs the payment and does not lay down a general rule on personal liability of tax officers.