M\/s PYRAMID INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
GST
2019 (3) TMI 149 – DELHI HIGH COURT – TMI
DELHI HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 20-11-2018
w. p. (C) no. 10999 of 2018 C. M. Appl. Nos. 42815, 42816 And 48246 of 2018
GST
MR SANJIV KHANNA AND MR ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, JJ.
\nFor The Petitioner : Mr.Abhishek A. Rastogi and Ms.Rashmi Deshpande, Advocates
\nFor The Applicant : Mr.Atul Kumar and Mr.Harshit Sanwal, Advocates
\nFor The Respondents : Mr.Vinod Diwakar, CGSC Mr.Amit Bansal, Sr. Standing Counsel And Ms.Gargi Sethi, Advocate for respondent
\nORDER
\nC.M. APPL. No. 42816\/2018 (Exemption)
\nExemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Application disposed of.
\nW.P.(C) No. 10999\/2018
\nCounsel for th<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n , 2018. Rs. 7.16 crores was paid in cash in August, 2017 and Rs. 5.39 crores was paid through input tax credit. No tax has been paid thereafter. It is stated that the last instalment was accounted for making adjustment against input tax credit. In other words, total amount paid in cash or input tax credit was Rs. 12.56 crores. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s PYRAMID INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.GST2019 (3) TMI 149 – DELHI HIGH COURT – TMIDELHI HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 20-11-2018w. p. (C) no. 10999 of 2018 C. M. Appl. Nos. 42815, 42816 And 48246 of 2018 GSTMR SANJIV KHANNA AND MR ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mr.Abhishek … Continue reading “M\/s PYRAMID INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17115","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17115","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17115"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17115\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17115"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17115"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17115"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. Counsel for respondents state that the total amount collected from VAT\/buyers under the GST regime is Rs. 18.37 crores.
\n4. Our attention has also been drawn to the letter dated 05.10.2018 written by the petitioner wherein it is recorded that the petitioner had offered to pay an amount of Rs. 5,11,60,450\/- to resolve the issue amicably with the customers.
\n5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this fi<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n