9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1402X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions in the name of Aditya Chemicals, a proprietary concern. For the business purpose, the petitioner had opened an account with HDFC bank, Memnagar branch, Ahmedabad. The petitioner would utilise this account for drawing LCs to be issued in favour of foreign exporters for import of goods utilised by the petitioner for manufacturing finished product being account no. 16758970000023. Besides this account, petitioner also has other bank accounts. 3. Respondent Tax Recovery Officer issued the impugned notice which was addressed to the petitioner's bank HDFC stating that sum of Rs. 2 crores is due from Aditya Chemicals i.e. the petitioner to Mahesh Gandhi, proprietor of DPS Commodities. Said creditor had incometax dues for the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces, in our order dated 25.9.2018 while issuing notice, we had briefly recorded the petitioner's contentions and grievances. It was recorded that the petitioner had no concern with DPS Commodities except for having normal business relations. The department therefore, cannot use the petitioner's account for causing the recovery of the tax dues of DPS Commodities. By way of ad interim relief, the attachment order was stayed. 6. The department appeared in response to the notice and pointed out that the petitioner had borrowed a total of Rs. 2 crores from the said DPS Commodities and its proprietor Mahesh Gandhi and repaid the same over a period of time, last installment of Rs. 75 lacs was repaid on 24.9.2018. We had therefore, on 15.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y aware about the order of attachment passed by the department asking the petitioner's banker to pay to the department any sum due and payable to DPS Commodities towards incometax liabilities of DPS Commodities. Though counsel for the petitioner stated that such order was never served on the petitioner, in the petition, as noted, the petitioner has made averments that on account of such attachment, the petitioner's cheque bounced and the payee transporter informed the petitioner, upon which, the petitioner approached the bank and was given a copy of order on 20.9.2018. The petitioner was thus fully aware about the department's attachment of his bank account. iii) Despite such attachment and communication which was to the knowl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id by the petitioner to the incometax department, its dues of DPS Commodities to that extent would have been squared up. In any case, the petitioner cannot take a stand that he utilised another bank account which was unattached by the department. The stand flies on the face of the record particularly when the petitioner was fully aware about order of attachment and had made a specific wrong declaration on oath stating that he owed no money to DPS Commodities. 10. Counsel for the petitioner however submitted that this would amount to double payment of Rs. 75 lacs by the petitioner to DPS Commodities. This would be for the petitioner to sought out with the said entity. 11. Under the circumstances, respondent no.2 bank shall release sum of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
