TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner stating that liability to make payment of tax is of respondent No. 1. Respondent no. 1 didn’t contest the demand but stated that petitioner has not disclosed the particulars in respect of which contract it requires decision and also notice issued by the respondent No. 2 to the petitioner and also stated that the petitioner may submit a fresh representation furnishing all the afo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oration Ltd., W.P. No. 10095/12 - M/s. Shubhanjali Construction v. M.P. State Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., W.P. No. 10097/12 - M/s. S S Constructions v. M.P. State Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. and W.P. No. 10098/12 - Arbee Contractors Pvt. Ltd. v. M.P. State Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., is identical and all the petitioners have received a notice from the respondent No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure P/4 dated 21-2-2012 and prayed in this petition that the respondent No. 1 be directed to decide the representation by a speaking order. 3. Shri P.K. Kaurav, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 submitted that the respondent No. 1 has no objection to consider and decide the representation of petitioner, but in the petition, petitioner has not disclosed the particulars in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as prayed by the petitioners to respondent No. 1 within a period of two weeks from today. An advance copy of the representation be also sent to respondent No. 1 by speed post. (ii) The respondent No. 1 on receipt of the representation shall consider and decide it by a reasoned, speaking order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the representation. (iii) If for deciding the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
