Amounts recovered under a withdrawn assessment order must be verified and refunded to the taxpayer.

By | May 20, 2026

Amounts recovered under a withdrawn assessment order must be verified and refunded to the taxpayer.

Issue

Whether the revenue authorities are legally required to refund tax amounts forcefully recovered from a taxpayer if the underlying assessment order is subsequently withdrawn by the assessing authority and no credit has been given to the taxpayer’s account.

Facts

  • The Assessment Period: The dispute pertained to the assessment periods of October 2019 and October 2020.

  • The Recovery: The Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of State Tax passed an assessment order against the petitioner, and the respondents subsequently recovered tax amounts pursuant to that order.

  • The Withdrawal: The petitioner asserted that the underlying assessment order was later formally withdrawn by the assessing authority itself.

  • The Missing Credit: According to the petitioner, the recovered amount was never credited back into their account despite the collapse of the assessment order.

  • Limited Relief Claimed: The petitioner invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court, confining their prayer strictly to the refund of the recovered amount subject to verification of the withdrawal, without seeking any adjudication on the merits of the assessment.

Decision

  • Verification Mandated: The court directed the revenue authorities to immediately verify the accuracy of the petitioner’s averment regarding the withdrawal of the assessment order.

  • Refund Ordered: The court ruled that if the withdrawal is found to be true and the credit has not yet been effected, the amount recovered must be refunded directly to the petitioner.

  • Disposal of Writ: The writ petition was disposed of with these explicit directions, delivering a final verdict in favor of the assessee.

Key Takeaways

  • No Tax Without Authority of Law: Once an assessment order is withdrawn, the legal substratum justifying the collection or retention of tax vanishes, making any recovered amount a debt owed back to the taxpayer.

  • Verification Protects Revenue Interest: Courts will issue conditional refund orders that require administrative verification of facts (such as checking if a withdrawal happened or if credit was already given) before the actual cash disbursement occurs.

  • Restricted Prayers Speed Up Relief: Confining a writ petition to a narrow procedural relief—like a simple refund based on an accepted withdrawal rather than arguing the merits of an entire tax liability—allows for swift and efficient judicial resolution.

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Asma Automobiles (P.) Ltd.
v.
State of Bihar-*
Mohit Kumar Shah and Arun Kumar Jha, JJ.
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14422 of 2025
APRIL  29, 2026
D.V. Pathy, Sr. Adv., Sadashiv Tiwari and Hiresh Karan, Advs. for the Petitioner. Ms. Shivani Dewalla, Adv. Govt. Pleader for the Respondent.
ORDER
Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-
“1.(i) The order dated 12.12.2020 (as contained in Annexure -P1 series) passed by the respondent no.2 for month of October 2020 falling in the Financial Year 2020-21 in Form GST DRC- 07 under section 73 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called the Act) served only on the portal and not served by other modes of service in terms of section 169 of the Act levying tax, amounting to 42,20,966 each under CGST and SGST totaling 84,41,932 on the solitary ground of non-filing of return in GSTR 3B (in view of filing of return in Form GSTR 3B on 31.12.2020) and payment of tax and late fee within a period of 30 days of the order in view of statutory provisions contained in section 62 (2) of the Act and also interest and being contrary to the said statutory provision and also Article 265 of the Constitution of India and the principles of double taxation be set aside and quashed.
(ii) The respondent no. 2 be directed to refund the amount of tax collected by debiting the electronic credit ledger to recover the tax determined by him under section 62 of the Act after filing of the return for month of October 2020.
(iii) The order dated 12.12.2020 (as contained in Annexure P1 series) issued by the respondent no.2 in Form GST DRC-07 in terms of Rule 100 (2) and 142 (1) (a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter called the Rules) for the Tax Period 2020-21 on the basis of a summary of show cause notice shown only on the portal and not served by other modes of service in terms of section 169 of the Act being contrary to the Rules be set aside and quashed.”
2. At the outset, the Ld. Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted, by referring to the rejoinder affidavit filed in the present case, that the assessment order dated 11.12.2019/12.12.2020, passed by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Purnea Circle, Purnea for the month of October, 2019/2020 falling in the financial year 201920/2020-21 has stood withdrawn, hence the amount which has been recovered by the respondents be directed to be refunded back in case the same has not yet been automatically credited in the account of the petitioner, as has been averred by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents.
3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and proper to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction that in case the averment of the Ld. Sr. Counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the assessment order in question has stood withdrawn, is correct, the amount so recovered be refunded back to the petitioner in case the same has not yet been credited in favour of the petitioner.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Category: GST

About CA Satbir Singh

Chartered Accountant having 12+ years of Experience in Taxation , Finance and GST related matters and can be reached at Email : Taxheal@gmail.com