9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 38 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (for short "MVAT Act"). 3. The impugned notice proceeds on the assumption that the Petitioner is a Director of one - Ananta Impex Pvt. Ltd. and/or of Mapro Ventures Ltd., being the registered dealer under the Act and against whom for the period 1st April 2016 to 31st March 2017 and 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018, there is a MVAT liability of Rs. 53,24,740/- and Rs. 1,14,97,921/- respectively totaling to Rs. 1,68,17,661/-. By the impugned notice Petitioner is informed that he has become liable to pay the said amount and that for such recovery, a charge is being created on the assets of the Petitioner as set out in the following terms:- "This is to bring to your notice that, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tands freezed:- Sr. No. Name Demat Account No. 1. Ajay Kumar Kaushal (Petitioner) IN300183-10725009, IN300183-10256243 2. Tripta Ajay Kaushal IN300183-10256251 3. Saurabh Kaushal IN300183-10256278 4. Ruchi Chand Seth IN300183-10256260 5. Mr. Bapat, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in so far as, the first period in question, in respect of which recovery is stated to be initiated against the dealer, the Petitioner had resigned to be a Director of Ananta Impex Pvt. Ltd. on 20th March 2017. It is his submission that for the second period, for which the recovery of Rs. 1,14,97,921/- is initiated, admittedly such period [1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018], is post his resignation. It is, therefore, submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents which had taken place post his resignation including filing of the revised returns. In supporting such submissions our attention is also drawn to the assessment order dated 25th February 2021, for the period 1st April 2016 upto 31st March 2017 in respect of which demand of Rs. 53,24,740/- which is an ex-parte order is raised. Our attention is also drawn to the demand notice issued by the designated officer dated 25th February 2021, whereby such amount was sought to be recovered from Ananta Impex Pvt. Ltd. 8. By drawing our attention to the documents as discussed above, it is Mr. Bapat's submission that the impugned notice, namely of issuing an intimation under Section 38 of the MVAT Act against the Petitioner was totally untenable, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to us by Mr. Takke from the file of the department which was produced before us. Such communication is issued invoking the provisions of Section 35 of the MVAT Act. Section 35 of the MVAT Act pertains to provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases. The same was issued more than a year back, hence, such provisional attachment stands automatically revoked by operation of law by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 35 of the MVAT Act, which mandates that every provisional attachment shall cease to have an effect after the expiry of one year from the date of the service of an order issued under Sub-section (1). We are not shown any order, whereby the proviso below sub-section (1) was invoked and/or for any reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such charge or transfer shall not be void if made for adequate consideration and without notice of the pendency of the proceeding or of the liability to pay any sum on completion of any proceedings. (2) Where any person liable to pay tax or other sum payable under this Act has, during the pendency of any proceeding under this Act or after completion thereof, created a charge on or parted with possession by any mode of transfer including sale, mortgage, gift or exchange of any of his assets in favour of any other person and the Commissioner is of the opinion that such charge or transfer becomes void under sub-section (1), then the Commissioner shall issue a notice and hold enquiry and decide whether the charge or transfer became void und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner. We also order that the provisional attachment of the Demat Accounts of the Petitioner and his family members has lapsed by virtue of the provisions of Subsection (2) of Section 35 of the MVAT Act.
16. Ordered accordingly.
17. Respondents are directed to file reply affidavit to this petition, which be filed within a period of one week from today, a copy of the same be served on the Petitioner.
18. List the matter on 15th September 2023, High on Board.
19. It is clarified that the department is not precluded from taking any action in accordance with law for recovery of the MVAT dues for the period in question against the entity Ananta Impex Pvt. Ltd. or Mapro Ventures Ltd. as also from its present Directors. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
