9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 4. Mr.Parth Bhatt, learned counsel waive service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.5. 2. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicant a public limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 has prayed for the following relief(s): "32(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records pertaining to the petitioners case and after going into the validity and legality thereof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... em, battery bank etc. 3.3 On 12.05.2010, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Enforcement, DivisionI, Ahmedabad (for short the "Enforcement Officer) made a surprise visit to the premises of the writ-applicant. The Enforcement Officer had an information that the writ-applicant was making unauthorized use of the Form C. The Enforcement Officer accordingly impounded the books of account of the writ-applicant and also directed the writ-applicant to provide certain other documents. 3.4 The respondent no.4 i.e. State Tax Officer (4) initiated the assessment proceedings and ultimately, passed the assessment order dated 31.03.2013 for the assessment years 200708 and 200809 confirming the liability to the ext ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10,00,000/ under the CST. Thus, in all, the writ-applicant was directed to pay Rs. 12,00,000/ for the liability under the GVAT and CST along with the bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,00,000/. Subject to the above pre-deposit, the recovery was stayed. 3.7 It appears from the materials on record that vide order dated 29.06.2013, the writ-applicant was granted stay on further recovery up to 31.07.2013. The hearing of the appeals was concluded and the appeals were transferred for pre-audit vide Javak No.1975 & 1976 dated 30.08.2013 for the year 200708 and 200809 respectively. 3.8 It is the case of the writ-applicant that on every occasion, he requested for extension of the stay order dated 29.06.2013. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers dated 20.11.2018, the bank accounts of the petitioner with HDFC Bank Limited at Mumbai have been attached in exercise of powers under section 44 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and that the concerned bank has further been directed to send demand draft payment of VAT/CST of the amount stated in the said orders. Reference was made to the decision of this Court in the case of Vitrag Impex v. State of Gujarat, rendered on 15.12.2017 in Special Civil Application No.21928 of 2017. 2. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, issue NOTICE returnable on 30.11.2018. By way of ad-interim relief, the respondent is restrained from withdrawing any amount from the bank accounts of the petitioner, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed till this date. In fact, by this period of time, the appeal itself could have been heard and disposed of. 10. It is not in dispute that the stay order is of the year 2013. It was extended last up to June 2017. Thereafter, there does not seem to be any extension. 11. It is brought to our notice that later, it was extended up to July 2019. Thereafter, vide letter dated 22.07.2019, a further request was made to the Deputy State Tax Commissioner to extend the stay, however, thereafter, it was not extended. 12. We are of the view that the action on the part of the respondent no.4 in attaching the bank accounts of the writ-applicant pending the appeals before the appellate authority is not justified. The Department has a b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
