9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 620X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concern was converted into Private Limited Company having the petitioner as one of the directors. The said company did not charge any sales tax/trade tax from the customers. The Company on 18th December, 1990 filed an application under Section 4-A(2-B) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for claiming exemption from payment of trade/sales tax for remaining period but the same was rejected. Thereafter an application was filed before the Commissioner of Sales Tax through registered post for continuation of eligibility certificate. It appears that the Assessing Officer framed ex parte assessment orders for these assessment years. Consequent thereto, the impugned recovery notices have been issued. The respondents cannot issue recovery certificate against the petitioner for the dues of the Company as the petitioner was a Director in the said Private Limited Company. The Company has been wound up by the order passed by the Delhi High Court. The petitioner did not offer any personal guarantee to the Trade Tax Department and as such, the recovery of the Company dues from the personal assets of the petitioner is illegal, hence the present writ petition. In the counter affidavit filed by the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... November, 2006 and the writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from taking action against the petitioner pursuant to the said recovery certificates. What is more important is that the assessment orders sought to be challenged, during the course of argument, have not been annexed along with writ petition. This is sufficient to reject the plea with regard to the assessment orders. The only averment in the writ petition is that the Company was entitled to avail exemption for remaining unexpired period and for that purpose, an application purporting to be under Section 4-A(2-B) of the Act was filed before the Commissioner of Sales Tax through registered post. The respondents in the counter affidavit have denied the receipt of any such application. They have come forward with the case that the records do not show filing of any such application. Further, the copy of alleged registered receipt is not legible and it is difficult to decipher as to on what date and from which post office, the alleged postal registered letter was sent. In other words, the very factum of filing of such an application is highly disputed. In view of the fact that highly disputed question of fact is involved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted into a Private Limited Company having 95% share with him. In this fact situation, he submits that the petitioner cannot escape his liability to pay the outstanding trade tax dues. The other limb of the argument is that in view of Section 18 of the Central Sales Tax Act, at any rate, the central sales tax dues can be recovered from the petitioner. The details of outstanding U.P. Trade Tax/Sales Tax dues and Central Sales Tax dues are as follows:- Sl.No. Assessment Year UP Central Total Amount R.C. No./Date 190-91 871702/- 1070696/- 1942398/- 153/28.11.06 291-92 956088/- 1341001/- 2297089/- 154/28.11.06 392-93 325411/- 179178/- 504589/- 155/28.11.06 The above fact is not in dispute. There appears to be no pleading of fraud in the counter affidavit. So far the dues under the U.P. Trade Tax/Sales Tax are concerned, in the absence of proper pleading, it is not appropriate to examine the plea of fraud. Contention of the petitioner that the outstanding trade tax dues/sales tax of the Private Limited Company cannot be recovered personally from the petitioner is well founded in view of the aforesaid decision in M/s Meekin Transmission Ltd. (supra). We therefore, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . To this extent, his plea that he is not liable to pay outstanding central sales tax of the company has got no force and the same is hereby, rejected. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner is not personally liable to pay the outstanding dues under the U.P. Trade Tax/Sales Tax Act of the Private Limited Company but in view of specific provision of Section 18 of the Central Sales Tax Act, is liable to pay the dues under Central Sales Tax Act and to this extent, the recovery proceedings are valid. The upshot of the above discussion is that the dues under the Central Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 amounting to Rs. 1070696/-, Rs. 1341001/- and Rs. 179178/- respectively can be recovered along with interest, if any, from the petitioner and his assets but the recovery citations for these assessment years referred to above issued under the U.P. Trade Tax/Sales Tax Act cannot be pressed against the petitioner. The hearing was concluded and judgment was notified for delivery, learned counsel for the petitioner on 8th May, 2013 filed the written submission. A bare perusal of the written submission would show that the petitioner has raised num ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
