← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26602/2017disposed of

Patel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of Punjab Etc

2017-12-15Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta,Mr. Justice Arun Monga2 pages

CWP-26602-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-26602-2017 Date of decision : 15.12.2017 Patel Infrastructure (P) Ltd.

... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the excess ITC, etc., to the petitioner as determined vide orders dated 28.08.2017 (Annexure P-1 to P-4) for the 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter and 4th quarter of the year 2016-17, passed by respondent No.5, along with all consequential benefits/reliefs i.e. interest etc.

2.

Learned counsel for the respondent(s)-State submitted that the petitioner had made a provisional claim of `17,31,63,431/- on account of refund for the aforesaid period, which stands released to the petitioner. 3.

However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was entitled for ` 17,79,12,646/-. Yogesh Sharma 2017.12.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-26602-2017 4.

Learned State Counsel submitted that the issue with regard to the amount of refund claim and also whether any interest is payable thereon under Section 40 of the Punjab Value Added Tax, 2005, shall be specifically dealt with by the Competent Authority at the time of framing of the final assessment, which is still pending. It was further stated that the needful shall be done on or before 31.03.2018.

5.

In view of above, learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and the same may be disposed of as such.

6.

Ordered accordingly.

( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE ( AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE 15.12.2017 Yogesh Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No Yogesh Sharma 2017.12.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document