Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
M/S. Sun Oil Company (P) Ltd vs The Tax Recovery Officer on 1 October, 2013
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
1
87 01.10.13 W.P. 29826 (W) of 2013
akd
M/s. Sun Oil Company (P) Ltd.
Vs.
The Tax Recovery Officer,
Kolkata & 24 Parganas & Ors.
--------
Mr. Rajarshi Chatterjee, Mr. Avinaba Patra, Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee.
... for the petitioiner.
Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, Mr. Soumitra Mukherjee, Mr. Sanjib Kar.
... for the respondents.
The order of the Assessing Authority was challenged before the Appellate Authority. After the dismissal of the appeal the matter was taken up before the Revisional Authority, who by an order dated July 17, 2013 quashed and set aside both the orders and remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority for fresh consideration.
Amidst the pendency of the matter before the Revisional Authority the department initiated a recovery proceeding against the petitioner and recovered in part the amount, which the Assessing Authority found the petitioner to be liable therefor.
After the Revisional Authority set aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Authority, the petitioner made an application for refund of the amount recovered under the recovery proceeding.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the Assessing Authority should have directed the refund of the amount as the same was made on the strength of the order, which has ultimately been quashed and set aside.
It is further contended that the authorities are contemplating to take steps for recovery of the balance amount despite pendency of the matter before the Assessing Authority.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for 2 the department, says that they would not take any further steps for recovery of the balance tax. However, he prays for accommodation to take necessary instruction in this regard.
The point as agitated in this writ petition requires consideration upon exchange of affidavits.
Let affidavit-in-opposition to the writ petition be filed within two weeks after reopening of this Court following Puja Vacation. Reply thereto, if any, be filed within one week thereafter.
Let this matter be listed three weeks after reopening of this Court following Puja Vacation.
The respondent authorities are restrained from taking any steps or further steps for realization of the amount from the petitioner or initiating any recovery proceeding any further until six weeks after reopening of this Court following Puja Vacation or until further order/orders of this Court whichever is earlier.
(HARISH TANDON, J.)