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

2018 (1) TMI 750

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. We thus take suo moto notice of contempt and direct the Registry to issue two notices under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Appellate Side Rules one for Civil Contempt and the other for Criminal Contempt to Mr. Sadashiv Mokashi the Tax Recovery Officer, (Central) Pune returnable after 8 weeks on 5 March 2018 to show cause why action for civil and criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 should not be taken. - Writ Petition No. 13099 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 5-1-2018 - M. S. Sanklecha And Mr. Riyaz I. Chagla, JJ. Mr. Nitin Dhumal, for the Petitioner Mr. Sham Walve, for the Respondents ORDER PC. 1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 10th November 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune (Tribunal) on an application for stay under Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(Act). 2. By the impugned order the Petitioner's application for stay of recovery of demand aggregating to ₹ 142.98 Crores was granted on the condition of the Petitioner depositing ₹ 18 Crores in three instalments i.e. ₹ 6 Crores each on 30th N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eady commenced. It is further pointed out that the Petitioner is unable to pay the amounts due to its staff as all its bank accounts had been attached under Section 226 (3) of the Act. It further points out that the amount of ₹ 9.27 Crores is expected to be received from the Social Welfare Department, Pune, State of Maharashtra before 22nd December 2017 and the Petitioner is desirous of paying the sum of ₹ 8 Crores out of ₹ 9.27 Crores to be received from the State Government to its staff in its efforts to persuade them to end the strike. The amount of ₹ 1.27 Crores was sought to be kept by it to meet essential expenses such as electricity, telephone, water, etc. charges. At that time, Mr. Walve, the learned counsel for the Respondent Revenue informed the petitioner that he would inform his officers not to withdraw an amount of ₹ 9.27 Crores which is expected to be received from the Social Welfare Department, State of Maharashtra in the attached Bank accounts. This he stated only to ensure that the students of the Petitioner institution do not suffer, particularly in view of the fact that the examination of Pune University of the Engineering course h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ;ble Bench gave following oral directions:- 1. That the amount of which is to be received by our Society from Social Welfare Department in all the bank accounts mentioned in the Affidavit will not be appropriated by Income Tax Department towards its dues till further orders from the Court. 2. That our Society, after receipt of the amounts from Social Welfare Department, should file an affidavit indicating the names of the employees, amounts to be paid to each of them etc. to whom the salary dues will be paid out of the amounts received in the aforesaid accounts. 3. It instructed your pleader to communicate these directions to your honour. 4. It posted the matter to 05.01.2018 for further hearing on merits of the case. This is for your information please. Thanking you, Yours faithfully M.N. Navale Principal. 9. The letter dated 21st December 2017 by the Petitioner addressed to the Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Nana Peth, Pune (wherein its bank accounts have been attached) reads as under :- To, The Branch Manager Punjab National Bank Nane Peth, Pune Madam, Sub.:- Attachment of bank ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ial Welfare Department to run the educational institutions and to pay the salary of agitating employees. 2. The Hon'ble High Court was pleased to pass oral orders directing the department to allow the assessee to withdraw the funds received by the assessee from Social Welfare Department. 3. In view of the above facts, you are requested to allow the assessee to withdraw the amounts received from the Social Welfare Department only. The restraint put on withdrawal in respect of funds receivable from Social Welfare Department stands withdrawn. However, the restraint to withdraw any other amounts credited is still in force till further orders. The amounts expected to be received also mentioned in the annexure. Kindly take a note of the same. Yours faithfully Sd/- (Sadashiv Mokashi) Tax Recovery Officer (Central), Pune. 11. Both Mr. Dhumal the learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Walve the learned Advocate for the Respondent Revenue who were both present and participants at the hearing held on 19 December 2017 agreed that no oral instructions were given by this Court on 19 December 2017. In fact at no time did we give any oral di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... led with the withdrawal of an amount of ₹ 9.18 Crores from the attached bank accounts without any order/direction from the Court establishes an attempt to overreach the court and disentitles the petitioner to any relief. In fact Mr. Dhumal the learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that neither of its two letters i.e. letter dated 20th December 2017 to the Tax Recovery Officer or letter dated 21st December 2017 to the Punjab National Bank speaks about allowing the petitioner to withdraw the amount. This is of no solace as by withdrawing the amount of ₹ 9.14Crores without any order of the Court, the petitioner s wrongful conduct stands exposed. 15. It is axiomatic that the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of issuing prerogative writs would not be exercised when the conduct of the petitioner is not clean. A petitioner seeking an extra ordinary relief from the Court is not only expected to come with clean hands but so keep it, till the disposal of the petition. In the above facts we are of the view that the conduct of the petitioner during the pendency of the petition disentitles it to any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore we dismiss .....

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