TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e second respondent to create encumbrance in respect of the subject matter properties only for the purpose of realising the tax dues from the said dealer viz., M/s.Ashok Spinners, Udumalpet. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is nothing to do with the said dealer and on the other hand, he purchased the subject matter properties by way of two sale deeds dated 25.11.2004 and 03.04.2006. Therefore, it is apparent that those properties were purchased much earlier to the order of assessment dated 29.07.2008. In any event, as these properties were purchased by the petitioner much earlier to the order of assessment and in view of the admitted fact that at the time of purchase, those properties were free from encumbrance much less an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quest to create encumbrance on the properties referred to therein. The petitioner herein is not in any way connected with the said dealer. On the other hand, he purchased the subject matter properties by way of two sale deeds dated 25.11.2004 and 03.04.2006, much earlier to the order dated 29.07.2008. Those purchases were made by the petitioner from the partners of the said M/s.Ashok Spinners. Hence, the present writ petition is filed by contending that the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained against the petitioners' properties as the same were purchased much earlier to the order fastening the tax liability on the said dealer. It is also contended that those properties were never attached by the first respondent at any point of tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the tax dues from the said dealer viz., M/s.Ashok Spinners, Udumalpet. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is nothing to do with the said dealer and on the other hand, he purchased the subject matter properties by way of two sale deeds dated 25.11.2004 and 03.04.2006. Therefore, it is apparent that those properties were purchased much earlier to the order of assessment dated 29.07.2008. It is also not in dispute that the subject matter properties were not attached at any point of time by the first respondent. When such being the factual position, it is not known as to how the first respondent has chosen to issue the communication to the second respondent to create encumbrance on the subject matter properties, without even ascer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out notice of charge under Section 24(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and therefore, the property cannot be proceeded against for the recovery of sales tax arrears. In the case hand, there is no charge on the property and there is no doubt about the bonafide of the purchase made by the petitioner, because it is TIIC who brought the property for sale. In Raghuvar (India) Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) I, Commercial Taxes, Jaipur reported in (2006) 144 STC 331, the Court considered the case of similar purchaser who had purchased the property without notice of Sales Tax arrears and it was held that the property, at the hands of the purchaser, was free of charge and it was not open to the Sales Tax Department to enfo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
