Disposed

Vista Tele Services v. The Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC13 Apr 2017WP/9003/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus. It directed the respondent Assistant Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation regarding an excess ITC refund claim and pass orders on merits within two weeks, without expressing views on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation regarding excess ITC refund and pass orders on merits within two weeks.

Vista Tele Services Vs The Assistant Commissioner — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

W.P.No.9003 of 2017

¶6

Vista Tele Services rep by Partner, No.139, First Floor, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004

¶7

... Petitioner Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Mylapore Assessment Circle, No.48, Greenways Road, R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028 ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer:

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner in letter dated 27.02.2017 seeking to refund the amount of Rs.44,71,329/remaining in excess in petitioner's account for the year 2015-16 by an order of assessment and refund order in Form P, in accordance with law.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Rajkumar For Respondents : Mr.K. Venkatesh Govt. Advocate O R D E R

¶11

Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶12

The petitioner seeks for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 27.02.2017, wherein and whereby, they sought for refund of the amount of

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

Rs.44,71,329/-, claimed to be the excess ITC amount in respect of the Assessment Year 2015-2016.

¶15

This Court, at this stage, is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim, made by the petitioner, as it is for the respondent to consider and decide. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of only with a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.02.2017 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶16

-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
The Assistant Commissioner (CT),
Mylapore Assessment Circle,
No.48, Greenways Road,
R.A. Puram,
Chennai – 600 028
+1 CC to Mr.P. Rajkumar, Advocate sr 22485
+1 CC to The Spl. Govt. Pleader sr 22676
W.P.No.9003 of 2017
RJ(CO)
sp/17/4

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Vista Tele Services v. The Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vista Tele Services v. The Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Muthuraman Vs The District Prohibition

Tvl.Abarna Pharmacy, Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Fac)

Spahi Projects Pvt. Ltd., rep. Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Sheela Foam Limited Vs Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Goel Steel Company, Vs The Assistant Commissioner

Rajeev. B. Mehta Vs The Commissioner