9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1593X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent - company. In the appeal filed by the petitioner - the wife of one of the Directors, she produced her personal property as security for the purpose of obtaining stay. Ultimately, the appellate authority had set aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. While the matter stood thus, the first respondent issued the present impugned notice calling for remittance of tax arrears, failing which, the property which was given as security during the pendency of the appeal be sold under the Revenue Recovery Act and tax arrears will be adjusted against the dues. 3. Aggrieved over the impugned notice, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Mr.R.Venkatraman, learned Senior Counsel appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice for recovery of tax arrears, the petitioner had sent a letter seeking one month's time to collect the details of accounts. Since she has executed the security bond as a legal heir of one of the Directors, the security bond is still in force and they are entitled to proceed with the recovery proceedings. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. 7. It is not in dispute that the security bond was executed in Form XIX during the pendency of the appeal for the purpose of obtaining stay. A reading of Rule 31(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959, would clearly show that the validity of the security bond shall remain in force during the pendency of the appeal. If the appeal is allowed or remanded back, it shall become voi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, the impugned notice issued by the first respondent is without jurisdiction and illegal. It is open to the first respondent to recover the tax arrears in the manner known to law against the defaulter and not against the third parties. 10. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, even though she is the wife of the erstwhile Director, she is a third party to the second respondent - company unless she is inducted as a Director of the said company. Therefore, the first respondent cannot proceed against her, much less in the absence of any fresh security bond executed by her towards tax arrears. 11. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned notice issued by the first respondent. 12. Accordingly, this writ pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
