9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 790X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... W.P.(C) 14633/2022. 10.1. According to Mr Nischal, the only change that has taken place is that the impugned notice is now confined to clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 74A of the DVAT Act. The earlier notice i.e., notice dated 07.10.2022, triggered both clauses (a) and (b) of Section 74A(1) of the DVAT Act. Since we need to examine the record and have the say of respondents/revenue placed before us, we are inclined to issue formal notice in the matter - Issue notice. - W.P.(C) 15396/2022 - - - Dated:- 11-11-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU Petitioner Through: Mr Varun Nischal, Mr Arif Ahmed Khan and Mr Vaibhav Mishra, Advocates. Respondents Through: Mr Raje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed a writ petition i.e., W.P.(C) 12933/2022 (which is also listed on our board today), in which, on 07.09.2022, the following order was passed: 2. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that it has not received the refund amounting to Rs. 2,14,70,300/-, along with interest, for all four quarters of Financial Year (FY) 2016-2017. 2.1. The record also shows that the notices of default assessment of tax and interest under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, have been issued, qua the aforementioned periods. 2.2. There are four orders on record, concerning all four quarters of 2016. 2.3. For the sake of convenience, tax demands vis- -vis the four quarters are set forth hereafter: S.N. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund. 8. The record shows that the respondents/revenue issued a notice dated 07.10.2022 under Section 74A(2) of the DVAT Act, which was assailed by the petitioner via W.P.(C) 14633/2022. 8.1. The said writ petition came up for hearing before this court on 17.10.2022 and was disposed of on the same date. At that point in time, the respondents/revenue were represented by Mr Satyakam, Additional Standing Counsel. The instructions that Mr Satyakam had received and which were conveyed to the court were to withdraw the notice dated 07.10.2022. [See paragraph 4.2 of the order dated 17.10.2022.] 8.2. Since the prayers for refund were covered by the earlier writ petition, to which we have made reference to above i.e., W.P.(C) 12933/2022, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the only change that has taken place is that the impugned notice is now confined to clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 74A of the DVAT Act. The earlier notice i.e., notice dated 07.10.2022, triggered both clauses (a) and (b) of Section 74A(1) of the DVAT Act. 10.2. This position continues to obtain in the fresh notice, which was, apparently, issued on 07.11.2022 i.e., the said notice also appears to be confined to clause (b) of the sub-section (1) of Section 74A of the DVAT Act. 11. Given the aforesaid position, for the moment, we are inclined to stay the proceedings which have been triggered pursuant to the impugned notice i.e., notice dated 25.10.2022. 12. Mr Aggarwal assures us that although notice dated 07.11.2022 is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
