Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sapphire Intrex Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 14 October, 2022

Author: Rajiv Shakdher

Bench: Rajiv Shakdher

                            $~32
                            *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            +    W.P.(C) 14572/2022
                                 SAPPHIRE INTREX LIMITED                   ......Petitioner
                                                 Through: Mr Charanya Laxmikumaran,
                                                            Advocate.
                                                 versus
                                 UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                     ......Respondents
                                                 Through: Mr Vinish Phoghat, Advocate for
                                                            R1/UOI.
                                                            Ms Sonu Bhatnagar, Adv. for R2 to
                                                            R4/revenue.
                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                                 HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
                                                 ORDER

% 14.10.2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 44585/2022

1. Allowed, subject to the petitioner filing legible copies of annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing. W.P.(C) 14572/2022

2. The principal grievance of the petitioner is, that it is not being accorded the refund amounting to Rs. 2.3 crores, which was deposited with the respondents/revenue, during the course of the investigation.

3. According to Ms Charanya Laxmikumaran, the money was deposited while the search proceedings were on.

4. The record shows, that the search was carried out on 20.10.2021. 4.1 The record also shows, that the search commenced at 03:45 PM, and was concluded the next day, at around 12:30 AM.

W.P.(C) 14572/2022 page 1 of 2 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:28.10.2022 14:23:40

5. The deposit was made by debiting the cash ledger.

6. The record shows, that this debit was made on 20.10.2021.

7. Ms Sonu Bhatnagar, who appears on behalf of the respondent nos.2 to 4/revenue, says that the refund application preferred by the petitioner was not maintainable.

7.1 It is also her submission, that the amount in issue [i.e., Rs. 2.3 crores] is adverted to in the show-cause notice, and therefore cannot be segregated from other issues.

8. Prima facie, the approach adopted by respondent nos.2 to 4/revenue is contrary to the instruction dated 25.05.2022, issued by the GST Investigation Wing.

8.1 The aforementioned instruction concerns the deposit of tax during the course of inspection or investigation.

9. Issue notice.

9.1 Ms Sonu Bhatnagar accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4/revenue i.e., the contesting respondents.

10. Ms Bhatnagar says that she will return with instructions. 10.1 In case instructions are received to resist the petition, counter-affidavit will be filed within the next four weeks.

11. List the matter on 12.01.2023.

                                                                                  RAJIV SHAKDHER, J


                                                                            TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
                                   OCTOBER 14, 2022 / tr
                                                             Click here to check corrigendum, if any


                            W.P.(C) 14572/2022                                                 page 2 of 2



Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:VIPIN
KUMAR RAI
Signing Date:28.10.2022
14:23:40