Star Catalyst Through Prop. Amit ... vs Commissioner Of Delhi Value Added Tax & ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 1482 Del

Delhi High Court

Star Catalyst Through Prop. Amit ... vs Commissioner Of Delhi Value Added Tax & ... on 21 February, 2024

Author: Sanjeev Sachdeva

Bench: Sanjeev Sachdeva

                          $~53
                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                                                 Judgment delivered on: 21.02.2024
                          +      W.P.(C) 2546/2024 & CM APPL. 10446/2024

                          STAR CATALYST THROUGH
                          PROP. AMIT AMARPURI                                     ..... Petitioner

                                                     versus

                          COMMISSIONER OF DELHI VALUE
                          ADDED TAX & ANR.                                       ..... Respondents

                          Advocates who appeared in this case:

                          For the Petitioner:        Mr. A.K. Babbar, Mr. Surendra Kumar and Mr.
                                                     Bharat Tripathi, Advocates

                          For the Respondent:        Ms. Shaguftha Hameed, Mr. Prateek Badhwar, Ms.
                                                     Samridhi Vats, Advocates for Mr. Rajeev
                                                     Aggarwal, ASC
                          CORAM:-
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

                                                JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to refund a sum of Rs. 11,78,453/-.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject

return for the fourth quarter of financial year 2016-17 was filed within the prescribed time and due date for issuance of refund was 22.05.2018. He submits that as on date the applications are still being shown as pending. He submits that refund till date has not been processed and credited to the account of the petitioner.

3. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for the respondents.

4. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to process the application for refund of the petitioner in accordance with law. In case refund is found admissible, the same be paid to the petitioner along with the statutory interest as provided under Section 42 of the DVAT Act, 2004 and if the amount is not refundable, the reasons for the same be communicated to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to avail of such remedies as may be permissible in law. The exercise be completed within a period of four weeks from today.

5. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

                                                                     SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J


                          FEBRUARY 21, 2024                           RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
                          'rs'