M/S Aneja Constructions (India) ... vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 5124 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13830 of 2021
     ======================================================

M/s Aneja Constructions (India) Limited through its Authorized Signatory Rakesh Kumar, aged 43 years, Male, son of Sri Bhiswanath Ram, resident of Basbitty, PS-Supaul, Dist. Supaul, having Registered office at V-21, IInd Floor, Rajaouri Garden, New Delhi-110027.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner cum Secretary cum Department of State Taxes, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Joint Commissioner of State Taxes, Central Circle, Patna.

3. The Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Central Circle, Patna.

4. TRF Limited through its General Manager having Regd. Office at 11, Station Road, Burmamines, Jamshedpur-831007 (Jharkhand).

5. The Project Manager, TRF LIMITED (site office), NTPC, Barh Dist. Patna, Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sandeep Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vivek Prasad (GP-7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 06-10-2023

The claim in the above writ petition is to accept the

refund application either by opening the portal of the

department or in the physical form. The refund claimed is for

the period 2017-18 and 2018-19. Section 54(1) of the Bihar

Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides that any person

claiming refund of any tax, interest or any other amount paid by

him may make an application before the expiry of two years Patna High Court CWJC No.13830 of 2021 dt.06-10-2023

from the relevant date in such form and manner as may be

prescribed.

2. Admittedly, the petitioner did not make an

application for refund within the period provided. The reason

stated for the application not having been filed is a dispute with

the party respondent. We are not satisfied that the reason stated

is reasonable nor can the limitation be extended under Section

54(1).

3. We find absolutely no reason to entertain the writ

petition and the same stands dismissed.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

(Rajiv Roy, J) P.K.P./-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          07.10.2023
Transmission Date