9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h ORDER None appears for the petitioner. Heard Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition, for quashing the order passed by the first respondent dated 25.08.2005, which is a notice calling upon the petitioner to pay the arrears of sales tax arising under the various assessment orders passed under the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing before the BIFR, the particulars regarding the terms of reference, any orders passed in that regard and merely stating that they are entitled to protection in terms of Section 22(1) of the SICA, would not suffice. 5. This Court finds merit in the submissions of the learned Government Advocate. If the petitioner's case is that they are Sick Industrial Company; they are before the BIFR and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve proof of the same to the Department on or before 30.4.1999. (ii) if there is any scheme framed under the said Act or if proceedings are pending before the BIFT, the respondent is directed to make recovery only after getting the consent of the BIFR. (iii) if there are no proceedings pending, the respondent is at liberty in accordance with law. 6. On a perusal of the above direction i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... juncture, the impugned notice cannot be quashed. However, with a view to afford an opportunity to the petitioner, the respondent is directed to keep the notice impugned in this Writ Petition in abeyance for a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within such time, the petitioner shall produce appropriate proof to show about the proceedings pending before the BIFR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
