ANTONY DOMINIC , J.
The appellant has executed works contract during the assessment years 1991-92 to 2000-01. They made claim for refund of the tax deducted at source pertaining to the assessment years 1991-92 to 2000-01. By Exhibit P6 series of orders, refund was allowed only for four assessment years. That was forwarded to the 4th respondent, who by Exhibits P7(a) and P7(b) returned it stating that there was no remittance in the Treasury. It was in such circumstances, the Writ Petition was filed.
2. By the judgment under appeal, the learned Judge directed that further action based on Exhibit P6 series of refund orders should be taken, but at the same time, declined the prayer of the appellant for refund in relation to the remaining years. It is this judgment, which is under challenge before us.
3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. Insofar as the claim of the appellant for refund in respect of the assessment years which are not covered by Exhibit P6 series of refund orders are concerned, case of the respondents show that instead of making remittances at the designated office, the tax deducted at the appellant's place of assessment was remitted with their Assessing Officer and that too enmasse. It is also their case that due to lapse of long time, they are unable to trace out the records pertaining to the remittances in question. Such being the factual situation, we will not be justified in entertaining the claim now urged by the learned counsel for the appellant.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant then contended that under Section 89 of the KVAT Act, the appellant ought to be awarded interest at the rate of 10%. It is true that Section 89(4) of the KVAT Act recognises the entitlement for interest in cases of refund. But, however, from the peculiar facts noticed above, we do not think that this Court will be justified in granting the prayers.
6. Be that as it may, as directed by the learned Single Judge, further action in order to give effect to Exhibit P6 series of refund orders shall be taken by the respondents.
With the above observation, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE dsn Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE