9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 790X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t least three days before the next date of hearing. CM No. 47847/2022 2. The substantive prayer made in the application reads as follows:- "(a) Summon the entire records of the Respondent No.2 (Special Commissioner) along with that of Respondent No.3 (AVATO, Ward-61) in connection with revisionary proceedings initiated through notices dated 07.10.2022 and 25.10.2022"; 3. Issue notice. 3.1. Mr Rajeev Aggarwal accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue. 4. Mr Aggarwal says that since the respondents/revenue have no objection to producing the record, the prayer in the application can be allowed. 4.1. It is ordered accordingly. 5. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. W.P.(C) 15396/2022 & CM No. 47846/2022 [Applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arters of 2016, can remit the balance amount claimed by the petitioner towards refund. 4. Accordingly, issue notice to the respondents/revenue. 4.1. Mr Avishkar Singhvi accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue. 5. Mr Singhvi says that he will return with instructions. 5.1. If instructions are received to resist the writ petition, counter-affidavit will be filed, before the next date of hearing. 6. Accordingly, list the matter on 12.12.2022." 7.1. The said writ petition is now listed for 12.12.2022. It is evident from the extract above that the substantive prayer made in W.P.(C) 12933/2022 concerns the issuance of directions for refund. 8. The record shows that the respondents/revenue issued a notice dated 07.10.2022 u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2022, which required petitioner's authorised representative to remain present before the concerned officer on 10.11.2022, projects the said notice as a "reminder". We are unable to understand as to why a reminder had been issued, once notice dated 25.10.2022 under Section 74A(2) of the DVAT Act had already been issued. 10. What is also strange, to which we have not received any explanation as yet, is that the impugned notice dated 25.10.2022 is almost identical to the notice dated 07.10.2022, which was withdrawn by the respondents/revenue as recorded in our order dated 17.10.2022 passed in W.P.(C) 14633/2022. 10.1. According to Mr Nischal, the only change that has taken place is that the impugned notice is now confined to clause (b) of sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
