9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (9) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion was also taken for recovery under section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act of 1922 in October, 1959, and a certificate for recovery through the Deputy Commissioner was issued on December 19, 1960, followed later by a letter dated April 9, 1963, to recover the entire amount claimed in this application. The company was ordered to be wound up by this court on July 6, 1964. So far as the amount of the claim itself is concerned, there can be no doubt about its accuracy because it is covered by orders of assessment. There appears to have been an appeal in regard to the earlier of the assessment orders, and the amount claimed is the amount as settled by the appellate order. The only question, therefore, is whether the applicant is entitled to pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontended that the amount of Rs. 7,934-1-0, due to the sales-tax department is not entitled to priority, because it did not become due during the period of 12 months next before the relevant date. I am of opinion that this contention is without substance. Section 530(1)(a) of the new Act does not require that a claim must become due as well as payable within the period of twelve months. In my judgment its requirements are satisfied if the co-existence of both occurs for the first time within the period. Even if the amounts of sales tax for the three years in question were due from before the period of twelve months, they were not payable previously. As they first became payable within that period, having already been due from before, I hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to section 178 of the Income-tax Act of 1961, but I do not see any relevancy for that reference because that section of the Income-tax Act contemplates an issue of notice to the official liquidator and deals with certain consequences flowing therefrom. There has not been any such notice in this case and therefore there can be no argument capable of being addressed on the basis of the said section. The rule as to priorities in section 530 of the Companies Act also does not seem to be a matter governed or to any extent affected by section 178 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the simple reason that the two sections deal with two different topics and therefore no occasion could arise for the operation of the non-obstante clause contained in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
