Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17130 (ALL)

M/S VINKO AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD. v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

WTAX/393/2025 · 2025-02-18

Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23935-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 393 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Vinko Auto Industries Ltd. Respondent :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Pooja Talwar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Parv Agarwal Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of Panchnama dated 17.10.2023 drawn by the respondents pertaining to their search at petitioner's premises on 17.10.2023. 2. Submissions have been made that during the course of search, the petitioner was forced to make payment of Rs.10,00,000/- through DRC-03 and a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- was debited in the credit ledger of the petitioner. 3. Submissions have been made that post search conducted by the respondents, no action has been taken against the petitioner. On 18.10.2023 i.e. the next day the search took place, petitioner had made a representation, inter alia, indicating all the aspects and requiring refund of the amount deposited by the petitioner and reversal of the entry, however, the representation remains pending despite repeated reminders in this regard. 4. Further submission has been made that the respondents be directed to decide the pending representations by way of a speaking order. 5. Counsel for the respondents has not objection to the prayer made regarding the disposal of the pending representation. 6. Consequently, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of. 7. The representation made by the petitioner shall be decided by Additional Director General, Meerut Zone, Meerut within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the petitioner with the said authority alongwith copy of the representation made. The petitioner would be free to file a fresh detailed representation. It would be required of the authority to pass a speaking order. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 nd (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad