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

1997 (8) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Board to such recovery. If such consent is not secured and the recovery is deferred, the creditors' remedy is protected for the period of deferment is, by reason of sub-section (5) of Section 22, excluded in the computation of the period of limitation. The words "any other law" in Section 22 cannot, therefore, be read in the manner suggested by learned Counsel for the respondents. We hold, in the premises, that the respondents cannot recover the aforementioned arrears of sales tax from the appellants without first seeking the consent of the said Board in this behalf. - Civil Appeal No. 1354, 1362, 363 of 1991 - - - Dated:- 4-8-1997 - S.P. Bharucha and V.N. Khare, JJ. R.F. Nariman, Senior Advocate (S. Sukumaran, Advocate, for JBD a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... other appeals) which was, as aforestated, in a position similar to that of the said appellant. The said appellant intervened in the writ petition and was heard. 4. The High Court said in its judgment on the writ petition that the question before it was whether the provisions of Section 22(1) of the Central Act overrode the provisions of Section 13A of the State Act. It held that there was no irreconcilable conflict between the two provisions as they operated in separate and distinct, fields and, therefore, both were capable of being obeyed. The result was that Section 22(1) of the Central Act "would not protect the properties of industrial companies from being proceeded against in exercise of the power under Section 13A of the State Act". .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pany shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board, or as the case may be, the Appellate Authority". 8. Learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance upon the judgment in Vallabh Glass Works. Vallabh Glass Works had been declared a sick industrial company within the meaning of Section 3(1)(o) of the Central Act. The appellant Gram Panchayat initiated coercive proceedings under Section 129 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act against Vallabh Glass Works to recover arrears of property tax. Vallabh Glass Works filed a writ petition in the High Court at Bombay claiming the protection of Section 22 of the Central Act. The writ petition was allowed, and the Gram Panchayat appealed to this Court. This Court not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sion, the words "any other law" in Section 22(1) of the Central Act must be so read as to exclude all laws on list II subjects, for Parliament must be assumed to know its limitations. Learned Counsel cited the judgment of this Court in Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Ors. v. Corromandal Pharmaceuticals Ors. - 1997 (2) SCALE 640, as supporting his case. 11. The Vallabh Glass Works judgment covers these appeals. Arrears of taxes and the like due from sick industrial companies that satisfy the conditions set out in Section 22(1) of the Central Act cannot be recovered by coercive process unless the said Board gives its consent thereto. 12. The Central Act is enacted under Entry 52 of List I of the Seventh Schedule. The said Entry 52 empow .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pondents. 13. The Corromandal Pharmaceuticals judgment dealt with a sick industrial company which was enabled to collect amounts like sales tax after the date of the sanctioned scheme. This court said, " such amounts like sales tax, etc. which the sick industrial company is enabled to collect after the date of the sanctioned scheme, legitimately belonging to the Revenue, cannot be and could not have been intended to be covered within Section 22 of the Act". It added that the issue that had been arisen before it had not arisen in the case of Vallabh Glass Works. It did not appear therefrom or from any other decision of this Court or of the High Courts "that in any one of them, the liability of the sick company dealt with therein itself aro .....

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