9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e First Appellate Authority s direction shall continue to be retained by the State and will be adjusted against the tax liability which shall be decided after affording opportunity to the parties in accordance with the law. The pending Second Appeal being Second Appeal No. 593 of 2021 be co-operated by the petitioner and the same shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition allowed. Noticing the fact that the base order has been passed on the basis of presumption and assumption and then thereafter the challenge had been made to the First Appellate Authority and then there is a pendency of Second Appeal before the Second Appellate Authority, the matter would require adjudication at the hands of the Appellate Forum and at the same time the requirement of deposit of pre-deposits in accordance with the law as quantified by the First Appellate Authority is already deposited before the Authority concerned. Without endorsing to the action of the Tribunal the amount of Rs.3 Crore directed to be deposited as pre-deposit may not be insisted upon in wake of these glaring facts, the property which is attached is valued at Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stay order vide order dated 12.07.2021 and directed to pay the balance sum of total demanded amount of Rs. 16,24,82,295/-. The First Appeal was dismissed on 24.08.2021 for non-payment of pre-deposit. 2.5 Thereafter, Second Appeal No. 593 of 2021 was preferred. The respondent authority initiated the recovery proceedings against the petitioner and hence, the petitioner made representation. The properties of the petitioner were attached by the respondent authorities and secured by assets worth approximately Rs. 61 Crore. 2.6 The VAT Tribunal passed an order on 17.01.2022 and directed the full amount of tax of Rs.3 Crore as a condition of pre-deposit to be payable within a period of one month on or before 28.02.2022. 2.7 The grievance on the part of the petitioner is that the VAT Tribunal decided the entire Second Appeal at the predeposit stage of hearing. It adjudicated and decided that the petitioner had collected tax and not paid the Government Authority. The assessment by the Assessing Officer has been done on the basis of assumption and presumption. The First Appellate Authority also had vacated interim protection despite having complied with the order of pre-deposit. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch as per the Valuation Report Part-II. The current outstanding dues as per the said report to be repaid to the Bank on 15.06.2020 the valuer prepared this valuation report was Rs.2,86,78,674/-. It transpires from the said Part-II Valuation report that, the total area of the Commercial Complex with land and SBA (Super Built up Area) 1,20,000 sq. ft. on basement, ground floor, mezzanine floor (showroom and game zone), S.F, T. F, and F.F. land area: 1931.93 sq. meter (2310.58 sq. yd.). The outstanding dues of the Bank reduced to Rs. 42,16,294/- as per the statement prepared on 01.02.2022. There has been a substantial decrease in the outstanding dues of the Bank. It appears that the property which has been attached values to the tune of Rs. 61,55,29,000/- (rounded off). The liability of the petitioner as per the Bank statement is to the tune of Rs.42,00,000/-. The Bank has already created a lien over the property and therefore, the State is desirous of creating a second charge noticing the possible tax demand, penalty and interest. 7. As is apparent from the chronology of events, the Second Appeal No.593 of 2021 is pending and the base order is passed with the property being in att ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il has on instructions submitted that so long as the Second Appeal of the petitioner is decided on merit after following duly the procedure, he, for present, would not insist on the attachment to the removed. Even otherwise, the Second Appeal since is pending requires the redressal at the earliest. The dues of the Bank since have now been reduced to Rs.42,16,294/-. There is nothing to prevent the State to create a charge on the property by sending a request to the Office of Sub-Registrar for the same purpose. 12. Resultantly, these petitions are allowed quashing and setting aside the order dated 17.01.2022 of the VAT Tribunal. As rightly held by the Tribunal the asset value of approximately Rs.61 Crore is attached by the department and the payment of Rs.60,64,430 /- at the stage of First Appellate Authority is already deposited. No further predeposit would be necessary to be imposed. 13. The Tribunal observed that the petitioner had sold the motorcycles of approximately Rs.61.70 Crore in the financial year 2016-17 against the transaction, the tax authority demanded Rs. 16,24,82,295/-. The tax collected by the petitioner from the consumers since had not been deposited in the G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
