2020 (8) TMI 839

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Counsel for the Petitioner : Sudeep Kumar, Rishabh Pandey Counsel for the Respondent : C.S.C. 1. Today when the matter was taken up through Video- Conferencing Shri Sudeep Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri H.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 to 3 appeared. 2. Let notice be issued to respondent nos. 4 to 7, on tak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....shall be entitled to recover from the person to whom the molasses is sold or supplied. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the case of M/s SAF Yeast Company Private Ltd v. State of U.P. [2008 NTN (38) 296], a Division Bench of this Court has held that the administrative charge is a tax and against this judgment, a Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.16261 of 2009, State of U....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the petitioner also. 8. Learned Standing Counsel has fairly submitted that interim protection has been granted in the aforesaid writ petitions. He prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. 9. In the meanwhile, as an interim protection, we provide that the respondents shall not demand any Administrative Charges, provided the petitioner continues to deposit GST....