Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

M.B Power Limited Reg. Office Hotel ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 January, 2022

Author: Sheel Nagu

Bench: Sheel Nagu

                                                                       1
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                     WP No. 16965 of 2016
                                      (M.B POWER LIMITED REG. OFFICE HOTEL GOVINDAM COMPLEX Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA
                                                                   PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 28-01-2022
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                          Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel with Shri Varun Kumar
                                    Chopra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                          Shri   Mukund        Chourasiya,   learned   Panel    Lawyer     for   the
                                    respondent/State.

I.A. No.557/2022 is taken up and learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

Learned senior counsel for petitioner, Shri Ranjit Kumar, points out that the demand for the period from 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 recently raised by order dated 17.12.2021 has been preceded by similar two demands made earlier of different periods which were also stayed by orders passed by this Court in the present case on 17.10.2016 and 12.01.2017 subject to deposit of 25% of the demand made in the notice.

Learned senior counsel for petitioner prays for staying of the demand dated 17.12.2021 vide IA-3 without being subjected to the requirement of depositing 25% of only the principal amount of tax levied and not of the component of interest and penalty in the demand.

After hearing learned counsel for rival parties, this Court is of the considered view that there is no reason to take a different view than the one taken by this Court in the present case while staying earlier two demands.

Accordingly, the demand raised vide IA-3 on 17.12.2021 shall remain stayed subject to petitioner depositing 25% of total demand of Rs.25,04,97,811/-, within a period of 15 days from today.

It is made clear that if the aforesaid deposit of 25% of total demand of Rs.25,04,97,811/- is not made within a period of 15 days from today then the Revenue shall be free to proceed with recovery on the basis of the demand Signature Not Verified SAN notice dated 17.12.2021.

List alongwith W.P. No.2034/2015.

                                       (SHEEL NAGU)                               (SUNITA YADAV)
                                           JUDGE                                      JUDGE

                                    Sateesh




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by SATEESH KUMAR
SEN
Date: 2022.01.29 12:41:33 IST