Sections 11, 21 (2), 36, 46, 66 and 73 Refund, Tax collector for wrongful claim of tax receipt The deputy collector allowed the refund of the taxpayer's invoice against those registered persons who were identified / identified. According to the receipt of Section 36 (1) of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, the Deputy Collector (judiciary) dismissed the claim for refund after issuing the show cause notice to the taxpayers. Before the Appeal Tribunal refunded the main components of the Department of Appeals before the Appeal Tribunal's refund was collected by the Collector (Sales Appeal) and what was unreasonable was the Department's appeal. Which could have been refunded only if the taxpayer had refunded it and the issuing authority had lost that aspect to the blacklisted units. According to the provisions of Section 21 (2) of Section 21 of Sales Tax, the Board had suspended registration. Act, 1990 Input tax / refund cannot be allowed against false receipts, even if the requirement of Section 73 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 was vacant as approved by the Collector (Appeal), Pitt tax claims that the taxpayers' returns were justified. Only money that was rejected under section 11 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, which was deposited in the public treasury, would be refunded if, in the series, none of the transacting parties filed a sales tax in the state treasury. If the claimant loses the refund, the claimant will be treated between the parties, not with the government. \ R \ n \ r \ n
