Forum Articles Highlights Notes SMS News What's New Events Imp. Links Contact More..
TMI - Tax Management India. Com Tax Management India. com
Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login
Home   Advanced Search   Bird's eye view
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. Versus State of Jharkhand & Others

2015 (4) TMI 126 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

Stay application - Recovery of tax dues - Issuance of garnishee order - order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - Held that:- Since there is an effective statutory remedy available to the petitioner, we do not propose to go into the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the writ petitions. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Senior Manager (Finance), BHEL, Bokaro Thermal Power Station is present in the Court and the learned Senior counsel on instruction submitted that the petiti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

we are inclined to grant interim stay of the garnishee order on conditions stated hereunder. - interim Stay granted subject to conditions. - WP (T) No.1156 of 2014, W P (T) No.1157 of 2014, WP (T) No.1159 of 2014 - Dated:- 25-3-2015 - R. Banumathi, CJ And Chandrashekhar,JJ. For the Appellants : M/s Binod Poddar, Sr. Adv. Darshana Poddar, Piyush Poddar, & Anupam Anand, Adv. For the Respondents : M/s Rajesh Shankar, GA, Lukesh Kumar & Kumar Sundaram, JC JUDGMENT Since a common garnishee or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mercial Taxes has directed the Chief Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station, Bokaro Thermal, District Bokaro to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs) which includes an amount of ₹ 21,21,016/- for the period involved in this writ petition i.e. for the period 200809 and also restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 from realizing any amount from the petitioner pursuant to the above garnishee order dated 20.02.2014. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer under Secti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e year 200809, the petitioner was assessed. On the basis of audit observation, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings and for the period 2008-09 (26.11.2008 to 31.03.2009) issued the reassessment order dated 07.02.2013. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said reassessment order dated 07.02.2013, the petitioner has filed a revision petition on 22.03.2013 along with stay petition before the respondent No. 1 which is still pending. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t vide letter dated 30.01.2014 deposited the aforesaid amount of ₹ 3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores) with the Commercial Tax Department. Thus, total amount of ₹ 3,25,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores Twenty Five Lacs) was adjusted against the disputed demands for the period 2009-10. 6. The case of the petitioner is that again the second respondent issued Memo No.125 dated 20.02.2014 by which he had directed the Chief Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tenughat Circle, Phusro, Bokaro under Section 46 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 contained in Memo No.125 dated 20.02.2014 in and by which the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes has directed the Chief Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station, Bokaro Thermal, District Bokaro to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs) which includes an amount of ₹ 16,24,231/- for the period involved in this writ petitio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for the month of Feb, 2012 total being ₹ 16,24,231/-. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said reassessment order dated 24.08.2012, the petitioner has filed a revision petition on 15.01.2014 along with stay petition before the respondent No. 1 which is stated to be pending. 9. Before filling of the revision petition the second respondent issued a garnishee order dated 29.11.2013 to respondent No. 5State Bank of India, Bokaro Thermal Branch and realized an amount of ₹ 25,00,0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he period 2009-10. 10. The case of the petitioner is that again the second respondent issued Memo No. 125 dated 20.02.2014 by which he had directed the Chief Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- which includes an amount of ₹ 16,24,231/- for the period involving this writ petition i.e. for the period 2011-12 (From June, 2011 to February, 2012) on account of tax due and/or penalty imposed or interest payable under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 200 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al Taxes has directed the Chief Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station, Bokaro Thermal, District Bokaro to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs) which includes an amount of ₹ 1,44,26,598/for the period involved in this writ petition i.e. for the period 200910 and also restraining the respondent Nos.1 to 4 from realizing any amount from the petitioner pursuant to the above garnishee order dated 20.02.2014. 12. The Assessing Officer, after completing the assessment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a supplementary stay petition. 13. The grievance of the petitioner is that even when the revision petition and also the stay petition are pending before the first respondent, the second respondent issued a garnishee order dated 29.11.2013 to respondent No. 5 - State Bank of India, Bokaro Thermal Branch and realized an amount of ₹ 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs). Again the second respondent issued garnishee order dated 09.01.2014 directing the DVC/Respondent No. 6 to deposit an amount .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ef Engineer, Bokaro Thermal Power Station to pay a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/which includes an amount of ₹ 1,44,26,598/- for the period involving this writ petition i.e. for the period 200910 on account of tax due and/or penalty imposed or interest payable under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 from the bank account of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said garnishee order, petitioner has filed this writ petition. 15. The petitioner has filed Interlocutory Applications being I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

00 VAT 2009-10 ₹ 1,44,26,598.00 VAT 2011-12 ₹ 16,24,231.00 VAT 16. When the matter came for hearing, we have heard Mr. B. Poddar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Shankar, G.A. appearing along with Mr. Lukesh Kumar for the State of Jharkhand. 17. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that even when the revision petition [in W.P.(T) No. 1157 of 2014] is pending and the writ petition has been filed, the respondents are n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted to dispose of the pending revision petition. 18. The learned counsel for the State of Jharkhand Mr. Rajesh Shankar submitted that insofar as W.P.(T) No. 1156 of 2014 (F. Y. 2008-09) and W.P.(T) No. 1159 of 2014 (F. Y. 2009-10), the revision petitions filed before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes were already disposed of and the revision petition pertaining to the financial year 2011-12 [W.P.(T) 1157 of 2014] is only pending before the Commissioner. The learned counsel further submitted t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the writ petitions. In respect of W.P.(T) No. 1157 of 2014, it is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the revision petition preferred by the petitioner is pending and the revision petitions in respect of W.P.(T) No. 1156 of 2014 and W.P.(T) No. 1159 of 2014 have finally been disposed of. If that is so, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail the statutory remedy as provided under the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Since there is an effective statutory rem .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uent to the garnishee order issued to the DVC, the petitioner - which is a public sector undertaking is not in a position to make day to day payment of salary, statutory liability and other legal obligations and keeping in view the interest of the petitioner - a public sector undertaking and also the employees, we are inclined to grant interim stay of the garnishee order on conditions stated hereunder. Accordingly, the common garnishee order dated 06.03.2014 in respect of the financial year 2008 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

Share:            

| About us | Contact us | Disclaimer | Terms | Privacy | sMap |

©Taxmanagementindia.com
A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.
All rights reserved.

Go to Desktop Version