TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal. An amount of Rs. 9,73,64,415 is due from the first respondent towards sales tax arrears for the years 1972-73 to 1995-96. Second petitioner had already issued assessment orders after issuing assessment notice to all the parties and after obtaining reply from the first respondent, assessment orders have already been served on the first respondent. Demand notices were issued for sales tax, surcharge, Central sales tax and interest for all those years concerned and after accepting the notice the first respondent refused to comply with the demand. State has already taken steps to recover the amount through the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. An amount of Rs. 47,06,670 is also due to the State by way of sales tax arrears from the second respondent, for the years 1975-76 to 1996-97. Second petitioner however completed the statutory formalities and passed assessment orders and served the same on the second respondent along with the demand notice. Since second respondent did not respond revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated by the State under the Revenue Recovery Act. 3.. State also initiated proceedings for recovery of the amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very of sales tax. Counsel submitted that there is no illegality in submitting the claims of all including that of the State to the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the Recovery Officer. Counsel made considerable stress on the decision of the apex Court in Allahabad Bank v. Canara Bank AIR 2000 SC 1535. Counsel submitted that the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act cannot override the provisions of the RDB Act. 6.. Right of the State to have priority in the matter of recovery of sales tax from the defaulters over the equitable mortgages created by them in favour of banks and financial institutions is no more res integra. Dealing with the provisions parallel to section 26B of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act by the various sales tax laws of other States, Supreme Court has already recognised the statutory first charge in respect of sales tax arrears. Reference may be made to the decisions of the apex Court in State Bank of Bikaner Jaipur v. National Iron Steel Rolling Corporation [1995] 96 STC 612, Delhi Auto and General Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. Tax Recovery Officer [1999] 114 STC 273, Dattatreya Shanker Mote v. Anand Chintaman Datar (1974) 2 SCC 799, Dena B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able by a dealer or any other person, State will have first charge. 8.. The Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 has been enacted to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the recovery of arrears of public revenue in the State of Kerala. Defaulter under the Revenue Recovery Act means a person from whom an arrear of public revenue due on land is due. Section 3 states that the public revenue due on any land shall be the first charge on that land, the buildings upon it and on the produce thereof. Section 5 deals with the procedure to be followed for recovery of arrears of public revenue due under the Act. Section 5 states that whenever public revenue due on land is in arrear, such arrear together with interest if any, and cost of process may be recovered by attachment and sale of the defaulter's movable property and by attachment and sale of the defaulter's immovable property. Authorities have also got the power for attaching defaulter's property and for arrest of the defaulter and his detention in prison. Section 6 states that arrears of public revenue due on land shall bear interest at the rate of 2 per cent per annum or at such other rate as may be notified by the Government fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of debts due to such banks and financial institutions and the Tribunal has jurisdiction, powers and authority to entertain those applications and decide it. 10. Recovery of debts determined by the Tribunal is dealt with in Chapter V of the RDB Act, 1993. Section 19 of the Act deals with procedure of Tribunals. Recovery officer under the RDB Act can function only on the direction of the Tribunal. Once it is found that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application preferred by the State Government, the question of subjecting it to the jurisdiction of the Recovery Officer does not arise. The decision of the apex Court in Allahabad Bank's case AIR 2000 SC 1535 deals with altogether a different fact situation. Apex Court has dealt with the powers of the Company Court under the Companies Act, vis-avis the Tribunal under the RDB Act. On a comparison of the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and the RDB Act court came to the conclusion that when there are two special statutes the latter will normally prevail over the former. 11.. Section 34 of the RDB Act deals with overriding effect of the said Act which states that the provisions of the Act shall hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
