Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8464 (HP)

EAST BOURNE HOTELS PVT LTD v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/3350/2025 · 2025-05-06

Sushil Kukreja, Tarlok Singh Chauhan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:HHC:12857 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 3350/2025 Decided on : 6.5.2025 East Bourne Hotels Pvt. Ltd. …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No For the Appellant: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Praveen Sharma, Advocate. . For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Addl. A.Gs. and Mr. Raj Negi, Dy.A.G. for respondent No.1. Mr. Neeraj Sharma & Mr. Ishaan Kashyap, Advocates, for respondent No.2. ____________________________________________________________ Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that it has deposited 100% of tax liability excluding the interest and penalty. 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 ( 2025:HHC:12857 ) 2 It is not in dispute that the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending adjudication before the appellate authority. 3. Therefore, in such circumstances, resorting to coercive steps that too having red entry incorporated in the revenue record at this stage would definitely cause serious prejudice to the business of the petitioner. 4. Given the fact that now entire tax excluding the interest and penalty stands deposited by the petitioner, we are of the considered view that the respondents need to be restrained from initiating or continuing with any coercive steps against the petitioner. 5. Consequently, the petition is allowed and any red entry having been made in the revenue record pertaining to the petitioner is ordered to be set aside. 6. The appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible and in any event by 30.9.2025. 7. It is made clear that till the time, the appeal is not finally disposed of, the respondents shall not take or continue with any coercive steps against the petitioner. 8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Sushil Kukreja) 6.5.2025 Judge (pankaj)