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

2018 (3) TMI 586

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the department is that such transfer was void. The transfer took place in the year 2007. No action was taken by the department for nearly 10 years. It was only when the petitioner asked for benefit of amnesty scheme the said view was taken. Even on ground of delay, laches and inaction, the department cannot be allowed to open such old issues. In the present case, the petitioner did apply before the last date, nevertheless, his offer was conditional. The petitioner did not make payment of tax dues. He only indicated that he has a buyer and who also would pay the tax dues on a condition that department will thereafter lift the attachment on the properties. This was not an unconditional application for benefit of amnesty scheme. The amnest .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ublic limited company. Petitioner no.2 is the Managing Director of the company. The company purchased certain immovable properties in November 2007 through registered sale deeds in the nature of plot of land with factory situated in survey no.7 of village Vadadla, District Bharuch from one M/s. Sonic Watches Ltd and another situated at survey no.8 of the same village from one Mahendrakumar Mohanlal Majithia for the purpose of manufacturing and coating of watch straps and accessories. The sales were also reflected in the revenue records. At the relevant time in the revenue records, no charge of the department was reflected. However, it seems that the erstwhile owners had certain outstanding dues of the VAT department. Subsequent to the trans .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... down. The petitioner does not have money to pay such sum. However, there is a buyer who is prepared to discharge his liability. If the assurance is given that when the principal tax is paid, attachment shall be lifted, the buyer is prepared to pay the said tax amount. 6. The petitioner's application for amnesty came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 21.3.2017. In such order, the authority conveyed to the petitioner that the erstwhile owners from whom the petitioner had purchased the properties have huge outstanding tax dues. Their transfers therefore was fraudulent in terms of section 47 of the VAT Act. The petitioner would therefore, be liable to pay the outstanding dues of the erstwhile owners. 7. Counsel for the petit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respect to department's stand that till the petitioner clears the dues of the erstwhile owners, the charge on the properties cannot be cleared. Second is with respect to the petitioner's application for benefit of amnesty scheme. 10. So far as the first issue is concerned, department's stand is palpably wrong. This is so for the following reasons. Firstly, when the petitioner purchased the properties, no charge of the department was reflected in the revenue records. There is nothing on record to suggest that to defeat the interest of the revenue, erstwhile owners had transferred the properties to the petitioner who happen to be close relatives or that the transfer was without full consideration. The element of transfer being .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the interest and penalty would be waived. In the present case, the petitioner did apply before the last date, nevertheless, his offer was conditional. The petitioner did not make payment of tax dues. He only indicated that he has a buyer and who also would pay the tax dues on a condition that department will thereafter lift the attachment on the properties. This was not an unconditional application for benefit of amnesty scheme. The amnesty scheme would be in the nature of an invitation by the Government and applying dealer would be making an offer. Such offer had to be unconditional. The petitioner therefore, did not make the application in proper requirement of the scheme. He did not deposit the amount. In any case, his offer that is, bu .....

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