2016 (11) TMI 895 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Properties under suit - proceedings against a deceased person - consequential relief of injunction restraining the defendant - Held that - it is seen from the records that no assessment order was passed so far and only recovery proceedings was issued and that too, after the demise of the dealer, V.O.S.Syed Mohammed, who expired 11 years prior to the issuance of the recovery proceedings. No recovery proceedings can be initiated against a dead person. Thus, the judgment and decree passed by the Courts have no legal force at all - this Court is of the view that no question of law much less a substantial question of law involved in this second appeal. However, it is open to the respondent to proceed further by passing assessment order for the years in question and initiate appropriate action in regard to the recovery of arrears, in accordance with law - appeal disposed off - decided against petitioner.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Validity of notice issued under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act.
2. Interpretation of Sections 50 and 51 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act.
3. Applicability of previous judgments to the current case.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The main issue in this case revolves around the validity of the notice issued by the respondent under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The appellants, who are the plaintiffs, challenged the notice dated 09.03.2007, arguing that it was void as it was issued to a deceased person, V.O.S.Syed Mohammed, instead of the correct person, M.Syed Mohammed. The appellants claimed that the notice was ab-initio void and should be set aside. The Trial Court and the Lower Appellate Court dismissed the suit, leading to the second appeal.

Issue 2: The appellants contended that the Courts below erred in not considering that no assessment order had been passed, and only recovery proceedings were initiated after the death of V.O.S.Syed Mohammed. They argued that no recovery proceedings can be initiated against a deceased individual. The Courts were urged to exercise jurisdiction and set aside the void notice. The appellants emphasized that the judgment and decree passed by the lower Courts lacked legal force due to the circumstances surrounding the notice.

Issue 3: The appellants raised substantial questions of law, including whether the Courts correctly interpreted the provisions of Sections 50 and 51 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and whether previous judgments, such as the one reported in 1997 (5) SCC 536 (Mafatlal Industrial Limited vs. Union of India), were applicable to the present case. The appellants argued that the judgments cited were not relevant to the facts of their case and that the Courts should have considered the specific circumstances surrounding the notice issued to a deceased person.

The High Court, after careful consideration of the arguments presented, observed that no assessment order had been passed, and recovery proceedings were initiated against a deceased individual, rendering the notice void ab-initio. The Court held that the judgments and decrees of the lower Courts had no legal force in this context. The Court concluded that no substantial question of law was involved in the second appeal, but the respondent was given the opportunity to proceed by passing an assessment order for the relevant years and taking appropriate recovery action in accordance with the law. The Second Appeal was disposed of accordingly, with no costs awarded.