9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (8) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The petitioner seeks quashing of order dated June 16, 1993 (annexure 11 to the writ petition) passed by the Divisional Level Committee, the respondent No. 2; for quashing the earlier order dated July 8, 1991 (annexure 5 to the writ petition), which rejects the claim of the petitioner for grant of exemption under section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948; and has also further prayed for consequen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection raised at the time of review. The petitioner thereafter filed the said order before the said respondent and the impugned order has been passed on June 16, 1993 (annexure 11 to the writ petition), again rejecting the review application of the petitioner. The contention raised is that in spite of the direction issued by this Court the said authority did not give an opportunity to the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apply its mind. It is not necessary for this Court to go into various grounds raised by the petitioner including the said amendment as we feel that the impugned order is not sustainable on the sole ground that the respondent No. 2 in spite of order issued by this Court on March 12, 1993 did not give an opportunity to the petitioner before passing the said order. The petitioner has specifically ave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ree months from the date the certified copy of this order is filed before it. The petitioner will file certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. 5.. Until disposal of the said review application of the petitioner the recovery proceedings for the assessment years 1987-88 to 1992-93 both under the U.P. and Central Sales Tax Acts shall remain stayed. 6.. With the aforesaid direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
