High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/12057/2016

B.K.S. Motors (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner Of Trade & Taxes

2017-04-25Hon'Ble Dr. Justice S.Muralidhar,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Chander Shekhar2 pages

Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

$~ *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

26 & 27.

+ W.P.(C) 12054/2016 B.K.S. MOTORS (P) LTD Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Jain and Mr. Virag Tiwari, Advocates.

versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE & TAXES Respondent Through: Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing Counsel, Govt. of NOT of Delhi along with Mr. Amit Sharma, LA, Department of Trade & Taxes in person.

AND + W.P.(C) 12057 72016 B.K.S. MOTORS (P) LTD Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Jain and Mr. Virag Tiwari, Advocates.

versus COMMISSIONER OF TRADE & TAXES Respondent Through: Mr. Satyakam, AdditionalStanding Counsel, Govt. of NCT of Delhi along with Mr. Amit Sharma, LA, Department of Trade & Taxes in person.

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR jORDER % 25.04.2017

1. Mr. Satyakam, learned Additional Standing counsel appearing for the W.P. (C) 12054/2016

Respondent/Department at the outset states that the notice dated 30^'' July, 2016 under Section 59(a) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 ('DYAT Act') (Annexure P-8 collectively) proposing to examine the matter regarding enforcement of the survey dated 15^*^ July, 2016 for the period 1^^ April, 2016 to 15^*^ July, 2016 and further notice dated 22"^^ August, 2016 requiring the Petitioner to appear before the AVATO (Ward 17) and produce the books of accounts and all evidence on which it relied in support of the above examination were issued by mistake and are hereby stand withdrawn. It is further stated that all the proceedings pursuant to the aforementioned two notices including the impugned notices of default assessments of tax, interest and penalty under Sections 32 and 33 of the DYAT Act dated 18"^ October, 2016 for all the quarters of 2013-14 and 2014-15 also stand withdrawn.

2. Mr. Satyakam further states that the Department proposes to proceed strictly in accordance with law.

3. In view of the above statement, the prayers in these two writ petitions do not survive. The petitions are disposed of as such. S.MURALIDHAR, J P CHANDER SHEKHAR, J APRIL 25, 2017/Rm W.P.(C) 12054/2016