Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2001 (2) TMI 993

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... les tax accrued due in respect of a business by name "Plywood House", Aluva, which was being conducted by one Mr. K.G. Chandran, who is no more now. He was son of 1st petitioner and brother of petitioners 2 and 3. The aforesaid original petition relates to the arrears of sales tax in respect of assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. 3.. O.P. No. 26101 of 1998 relates to the arrears of sales tax in respect of assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94. O.P. No. 13426 of 2000 relates to the sales tax due in respect of assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92. 4.. There is one common feature that is relevant in all the three original petitions and that is the contention of the 1st petitioner that she was never a partner of the business in qu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... produced before court, it is seen that the contention was raised before the revenue recovery authority through exhibits P1 and P2 objections filed before the District Collector, pursuant to the demand notice served on the 1st petitioner. The said objections were disposed of by the District Collector through a cryptic order, which is produced as exhibit P3 in O.P. No. 13426 of 2000. The order is not speaking in nature and the contentions were not dealt with in detail. Challenging the dismissal of the objections through exhibit P3, the petitioners jointly filed exhibit P4 revision before the Commissioner for Land Revenue under section 83 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, which was disposed of as per exhibit P10 which is produced along with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ready exercised his power under section 34 to authorise the Tahsildar to dispose of the matter and it was in this background that exhibit P13 was passed. Hence, the petitioners cannot take shelter under the decision aforementioned to contend that exhibit P13 is bad. 9.. Exhibit P13 is subject to the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner under section 83 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. The petitioners thus have a statutory remedy to challenge exhibit P13 and viewed from that perspective, I do not think it proper for this Court to intervene in the matter. The petitioners have to work out their remedy before the authority under section 83 of the Act. At the same time, it is necessary that the disputed aspects raised in these thre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntations have already been disposed of, the District Collector will serve copy thereof on the petitioners within the aforesaid period. 12.. In O.P. No. 26101 of 1998 the grievance of the petitioners is that the Tahsildar, who is the 3rd respondent in the original petition, has not acted upon exhibits P5 and P6 representations. There will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to dispose of the said representations, if not already disposed of, through speaking order, after notice to all the petitioners and after affording opportunity to be heard in person, within a period of one month from the date on which a copy of this judgment is produced before him. If any of these representations have already been disposed of, the 3rd respondent will s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... affixing notice thereof in a conspicuous part of the property and by serving copy on the defaulter. In the instant case, because of the documents allegedly executed by the original assessee such notice will have to be served on all the petitioners. In the absence of any provision available in the Act justifying sealing and possessing of the building, there will be a direction to the fourth respondent in O.P. No. 13426 of 2000 to re-deliver or permit possession of the building by the first petitioner for the time being. 15.. The revision, if any, from exhibit P13 order in O.P. No. 13426 of 2000 will be filed within a period of three weeks from today. The respondents will maintain status quo regarding the revenue recovery proceedings (ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates