TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>High Court grants exemption & stay, sets deadlines. Penalty proceedings allowed.</h1> <h3>BHARTIYA CITY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.</h3> The High Court granted exemption subject to just exceptions in the case. A notice was issued for the Writ Petition, with the Respondents' counsel ... Profiteering - HELD THAT:- Learned counsel for the Respondents has tendered in Court the report prepared by the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering dated 25.02.2019 which forms the basis of the impugned order. Unfortunately, the same has not been filed by the Petitioner which should actually have been filed by the Petitioner along with the petition. Subject to the Petitioner depositing the amount of Rs. 5,06,78,069/- with the Respondents within four weeks, the impugned order shall remain stayed. The amount, if deposited, shall be put in a fixed deposit for a period of one year. The disbursement of the amount deposited shall abide by any further orders that may be passed in the petition. Issues Involved:1. Exemption application2. Writ Petition3. Stay applicationExemption Application:The High Court allowed the exemption subject to all just exceptions in the case. The application was disposed of based on this decision.Writ Petition:A notice was issued regarding the Writ Petition. The Respondents' counsel accepted the notice. The court directed the filing of a counter affidavit within four weeks and allowed a rejoinder before the next date. The case was listed for a specific date in January 2020.Stay Application:In the aspect of stay, the court heard counsels for both parties and reviewed the impugned order. The Respondents' counsel submitted a report by the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering, which was not filed by the Petitioner along with the petition. The court decided that the impugned order would stay if the Petitioner deposited a specified amount with the Respondents within four weeks. The penalty proceedings were allowed to continue, and the deposited amount was to be put in a fixed deposit for a year, with disbursement subject to further orders in the petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
