PERSYS PUNJ LLOYD JOINT VENTURE v. THE COMMISSIONER VALUE ADDED TAX

Delhi High Court · 25 May 2016 · 2016:DHC:8923-DB
S. Muralidhar; Vibhu BakhrU
W.P.(C) Nos. 4896, 4897, 4898, 4899, 4900, 4901, 4904, 4910, 4911, 4912/2016
2016:DHC:8923-DB
tax petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court disposed of petitions seeking delayed VAT refunds on the Respondent’s assurance to process all pending refunds with interest within two months, subject to revival if not complied with.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
12-18,20-22
W.P.(C) 4896/2016
PERSYS PUNJ LLOYD JOINT VENTURE Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vinod Srivastava, Mr. Ravi Chandhok, Advocates.
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER VALUE ADDED TAX Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4897/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4898/2016
W.P.(C) Nos. 4896,4897, 4898, 4899,4900,4901,4904,4910,4911,4912/2016 Page I of5
2016:DHC:8923-DB
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4899/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4900/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. GautamNarayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4901/2016
W.P.(C) Nos. 4896,4897, 4898, 4899,4900,4901,4904,4910,4911,4912/2016 Page 2of5
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER VALUE ADDED TAX ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4904/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
WITH
W.P.(C) 4910/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. GautamNarayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate withMr. VinodKumar, VATO
Ward-62.
W.P.(C) Nos. 4896,4897, 4898, 4899,4900,4901,4904,4910,4911,4912/2016 Page3of5
And
W.P.(C) 4911/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
And
W.P.(C) 4912/2016
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.R. A. Iyer, Advocate with Mr. Vinod Kumar, VATO
Ward-62.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
25.05.2016
ORDER

1. Notice. Mr. Gautam Narayan, Additional Standing counsel for the W.P.(C) Nos. 4896,4897, 4898, 4899,4900,4901,4904,4910,4911,4912/2016 Page[4] of[5] Respondent accepts notice.

2. The short question that arises in these petitions concerns the pending refunds due to the Petitioner, which ought to have been processed by the Respondent Department of Trade and Taxes (DT&T) in terms of the time limits inSection 38 ofthe Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 ('DYAT').

3. Mr Narayan, learned counsel for the Respondent does not contest the legal position but points to a practical difficulty of the DT&T being able to process only one refund application in a week. On instructions ofMr. Vinod Kumar, VATO, Ward-62, who is present in Court, Mr Narayan assures the Court that within a period of two months from today all the refunds due to the Petitioner will be processed and refund orders, including the interest amount due in accordance with law, will be issued to the Petitioner.

4. Placing on record the above assurance of Mr Narayan, the writ petitions are disposed of. However, if the above assurance is not adhered to, it will be open to the Petitioner to revive these petitions.

S.MURALIDHAR, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 25, 2016 mg