TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... situated of the petitioners whose cases have been allowed by this Court, the petitioner is also entitled for the same relief. At the cost of repetition, it is again opined that the subsequent Notification dated 17.07.2012, which is clarificatory in nature, has retrospective effect in its operation.Accordingly, the respondent No.2/SDMC is directed to refund a sum of ₹ 13,17,32,564/- to the petitioner within a period of two months from today, failing which the petitioner shall be entitled for the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on delayed payment. Decided in favour of assessee. - W.P.(C) No. 4195/2013 - - - Dated:- 14-1-2015 - MR. SURESH KAIT, J. For the Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vino ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing income tax exemption were exempted from levy of additional FAR charges. 3. During the pendency of the aforementioned batch of writ petitions, the respondent No.3/Municipal Corporation of Delhi herein(for short MCD ) raised a demand on the present petitioner on 08.07.2010 for a sum of ₹ 13,17,32,564/- as additional FAR charges. The aforementioned clarificatory Notification was brought to the notice of the Division Bench of this Court, the said Court while disposing of the aforesaid batch of writ petitions vide its final order dated 20.07.2012, directed refund in favour of the petitioners therein. 4. In view of the aforementioned order passed by this Court, the petitioner also being similarly situated person filed a represent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.2014, the Division Bench of this Court held as under:- 24. In the instant case the moment the notification dated December 23, 2008 was promulgated, representations were made to do away with the condition of paying extra premium for the extra FAR. A committee was constituted to look into the issue, which decided that for three category of bodies : (i) Education, (ii) Health Care and (iii) Social Welfare, the additional charges need to be withdrawn. The Central Government accepted the same. The notification dated July 17, 2012 was promulgated. The object of the legislation is to confer a benefit without taking away anybody s vested right and without inflicting a corresponding detriment on some other person or on the public ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as per the prevailing law, once a case stood finalized, the same attains finality and cannot be reopened if some amendment in the law is made subsequently. Moreover, the petitioner never challenged the Notification dated 23.12.2008 issued by DDA. In fact, the petitioner has taken the benefit under the said DDA Notification. Thus, once the aforesaid Notification has been accepted by the petitioner, then it is bound by the decision taken under the same. 12. Ms.Pushkarna further submitted that the petitioner has erred in relying upon the order dated 20.07.2012 passed by this Court in batch of writ petitions, lead matter being W.P.(C) No. 9572/2009, as the said order is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case on two coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
