TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Urgent Decision Required on Stay Application in Commercial Tax Dispute</h1> The court directed the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad, to decide the stay application within three working days to address ... Stay application - Recovery of tax - Held that:- Addl. Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad-respondent no.1 to decide the stay application in the pending appeals for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 within a period of three working days from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:- Delay in deciding stay applications and appeals for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09.- Refund due to the petitioner for input tax credit.- Demand pressed against the petitioner.- Applicability of cited judgments.- Need for expedited decision on stay application.Analysis:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad, to decide the stay applications and appeals for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The petitioner highlighted delays in the consideration of these applications by the respondent no.1. Additionally, the petitioner claimed refunds of input tax credit amounting to Rs.134.66 crores from April 2009 to August 2013 and Rs.12.77 crores from January 2008 to March 2009, emphasizing that the department was delaying the refund process. A demand of Rs.47,56,80,873/- was pressed against the petitioner, leading to concerns about recovery without a decision on the stay application.During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel cited judgments in support of their submissions, including the case of Smita Agrawal (HUF) v. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors., and Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. Union of India. However, the State respondents argued that these judgments were not applicable to the current case as they were rendered in different contexts. The State counsel emphasized the need for the Commissioner to expedite the decision on the stay application under Section 55(6).The court acknowledged the petitioner's concerns regarding recovery without a decision on the stay application but noted that the cited judgments were not directly relevant to the commercial tax proceedings under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008. Despite this, the court directed the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Ghaziabad, to decide the stay application within three working days from the date of the court's order to address the pressing recovery issue. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, and the parties were instructed to receive the authenticated certified copy of the order promptly for further action.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
