9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (12) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary jurisdiction of this Court does not arise looking at the nature of the relief. 3. It is the case of the applicants that applicant No. 1 is a public limited company which has been declared a relief undertaking under the Bombay Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1958, by the State of Gujarat. It is also a sick undertaking within the meaning of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 as proceedings have been registered under Reference No. 185 of 1998 on 10-7-1998. The applicants on 24-9-1998, received a letter addressed by the Sales Tax Officer calling on the applicants to pay the sales tax dues. In the said letter it is pointed out that the applicants had collected sales tax separately by sale invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing up of the industrial company or for execution, distress or the like against any of the properties of the industrial company or for the appointment of a receiver in respect thereof and no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect of any loans or advance granted to the industrial company shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority." 5. The learned counsel also relies on a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tata Davy Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1998] 93 Comp. Cas. 1 1 . 6. On the other hand on behalf of the respondents it is contended that provisions of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellate Authority. Further it is only those proceedings like winding up or for execution, distress or the like which cannot be initiated without the permission of the Board or the Appellate Authority. In the light of that it will have to be examined whether the proceedings under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code are barred from being initiated without the consent of the Board or as the case may be the Appellate Authority. 8. Let us then examine whether the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tata Davy Ltd. ( supra ) is applicable and concludes the matter. In that case sales tax was sought to be recovered in exercise of the powers conferred under section 13A of the said Act (Sales Tax Act). These were proceedings in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no scheme, but what was under consideration was the recovery of the sales tax by way of execution under section 13A of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act. It is in that context that the law has been declared by the Apex Court. This judgment is also of no assistance in deciding the issue that has arisen here. Proceedings under section 406 are not proceedings for recovery of sales tax. Proceedings under section 406 are proceedings of a criminal nature where a party is being prosecuted for the offence against the State. Penal provisions like this cannot be said to be proceedings which would fall under the expression execution, distress or the like. What section 22 contemplates is proceedings of a civil nature or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
