9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred by the petitioner is pending and the revision petition in respect of W.P.(T) No. 1183 of 2014 has finally been disposed of. If that is so, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail the statutory remedy as provided under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Since there is an effective statutory remedy available to the petitioner, we do not propose to go into the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the writ petitions. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Senior Manager (Finance), BHEL, Bokaro Thermal Power Station is present in the Court and the Senior counsel on instruction submitted that the petitioner has sufficient funds with the DVC and the statement is recorded. Having regard to the submissions of the petitioner that the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has directed the Chief Engineer, Chandrapura Thermal Power Station, Chandrapura, District Bokaro to pay a sum of ₹ 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Only) which includes an amount of ₹ 13,44,582/- (Rupees Thirteen Lacs Forty Four Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Two Only) for the period involved in this writ petition i.e. for the period 200708 and also restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 from realizing any amount from the petitioner pursuant to the above garnishee order dated 09.01.2014. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under Section 25 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 and is also a registered dealer under Section 7 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d another reassessment order dated 10.10.2012 assessing tax amount of ₹ 3,96,81,815/- was passed and a demand notice No. 2308 dated 10.10.2012 was served on the petitioner showing the tax payable as ₹ 3,83,37,233/-. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said reassessment order dated 10.10.2012, the petitioner filed a revision petition on 26.12.2012 along with stay petition before the respondent No. 1 (Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ranchi). The revision petition was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the respondent No. 2 (Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tenughat Circle, Bokaro) to decide the matter on merit and to pass suitable order in accordance with law by 28.12.2013. According to the petitioner, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petition on 12.02.2014 by filing supplementary revision petition along with a supplementary stay petition. 8. The grievance of the petitioner is that even when the revision petition and also the stay petition are pending before the first respondent, the second respondent issued a garnishee order contained in Memo No. 14 dated 09.01.2014 by which he has directed the Chief Engineer, Chandrapura Thermal Power Station, Chandrapura, District Bokaro (respondent No. 5) to pay in the Government Treasury a sum of ₹ 2,00,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Crore Only) against the alleged tax of ₹ 3,45,12,576.00 (Rupees Three Crore Forty Five Lacs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Six Only) for the period involved in this writ petition i.e. for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner is not in a position to make day to day payment of salary, statutory liability and other legal obligation due to such coercive recovery by attachment/garnishee of the account of DVC. The learned Senior Counsel therefore submits that the garnishee order issued to DVC may be quashed or may be kept in abeyance and in the meantime, the Commissioner may be directed to dispose of the pending revision petition. 12. The learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Rajesh Shankar submitted that inspite of the demand, the petitioner has not made payment and the writ petitions filed by the petitioner during the pendency of the review petitions are not maintainable. The learned counsel submitted that the revision petition filed before the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quent to the garnishee order issued to the DVC, the petitioner which is a public sector undertaking is not in a position to make day to day payment of salary, statutory liability and other legal obligations and keeping in view the interest of the petitioner a public sector undertaking and also the employees, we are inclined to grant interim stay of the garnishee order on conditions stated hereunder. Accordingly, the common garnishee order dated 06.03.2014 in respect of the financial year 2007-08 in W.P.(T) No. 1183 of 2014 and 2009-10 in W.P.(T) No. 1200 of 2014 is ordered to be kept in abeyance for four months. 15. These writ petitions are disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) That the petitioner sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
