9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no transfer of business so attachment notice u/s 11 is set aside. - 5632 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 5-6-2007 - Bilal Nazki and S. Ananda Reddy, JJ. [Order per : Bilal Nazki, J.].- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction that the respondents should not give effect to the notice dated 28-12-2006 served on the petitioner on 13-01-2007. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3-01-2007, whereas the sale was effected on 05-01-2007. The property purchased by the petitioner did not belong to any Company, but it belongs to an individual, as such the impugned notice is bad and is liable to be struck down. 4. Mr. A. Rajashekar Reddy, the learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents relied on the proviso to Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer empowered by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, after obtaining written approval from the Commissioner of Central Excise, for the purpose of recovering such duty or other sums recoverable or due from such predecessor at the time of such transfer or otherwise disposal or change." 6. On bare perusal of the proviso, it becomes clear that where a person from whom duty or any other sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
