GUJARAT STATE RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
SCA/10305/2008HC GujaratGJHC24017394200822 August 2008Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.A.PUJ,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA6 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, considering the pendency of the appeal before the ITAT and a stay application, chose not to delve into the merits of the case. To serve the interest of justice, the Court directed the ITAT to dispose of the appeal on priority, on or before October 15, 2008. The Court also noted that the stay application was fixed for September 5, 2008, and the ITAT could either hear the stay application on that date or take up the appeal for final hearing by October 15, 2008. Recognizing the substantial demand of over Rs. 17 crores, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 50 lacs by August 26, 2008. Upon this deposit, the impugned notices and the demand would be suspended until the appeal's decision. This indulgence was granted due to the petitioner being a trust constituted by the State Government for implementing government projects. The petitioner was also directed not to seek any adjournments before the ITAT.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gujarat State Rural Road Development Agency, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging notices issued under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. These notices, dated June 27, 2008, and August 7, 2008, were directed to bank managers, demanding payment of amounts due to the petitioner to recover arrears of Rs. 17,14,19,056/-. The petitioner sought to quash these notices and prevent coercive recovery until the disposal of their second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The High Court initially granted ad-interim relief, preventing coercive recovery and freezing bank amounts until August 14, 2008. Subsequently, a rule was issued, and the matter was fixed for final hearing.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices issued under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for recovery of arrears amounting to Rs. 17,14,19,056/- are valid and should be enforced pending the disposal of the second appeal before the ITAT? Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argued that the recovery proceedings initiated through the Section 226(3) notices were premature and oppressive, especially as a second appeal was pending before the ITAT. They sought to quash these notices and stay the recovery until the appeal was decided. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's contentions. However, the issuance of notices under Section 226(3) implies their stance that recovery was permissible and necessary to recover the outstanding tax demand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 226(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
SCA/1030520/2008 1/6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10305 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY - Petitioner(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MANISH J SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Respondent(s) : 1, DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 2, None for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Date : 22/08/2008

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)

SCA/1030520/2008 2/6

1.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing the notices at Ex.M and Ex.P Collectively, whereby the respondent No.2 has issued notice under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 27.6.2008 on the Branch Manager, State Bank of India Main Branch, Gandhinagar and the Manager, Dena Bank as well as the Branch Manager, State Bank of India dated 7.8.2008 to pay forthwith any amount due from the said Banks or held by them, for or on account of the petitioner upto the amount of arrears to the tune of Rs.17,14,19,056/-. The petitioners have also prayed for the direction asking the respondents Nos.1 and 2 not to press and/or recover the said demand till the disposal of the second appeal before the respondent No.3 and to lift attachment notices at Ex.M and Ex.P Collectively.

2.

We have issued notice on 12.8.2008 and SCA/1030520/2008 3/6 considering

the peculiar

facts

and circumstances of the case and further considering the averments made in the petition and the submissions of Mr.J.P. Shah ad-interim relief was granted to the effect that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 shall not effect coercive recovery against the outstanding dues and the amounts which are lying in the bank shall not be recovered till 14.8.2008. 3. On service of the notice Mrs.Mauna Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel has appeared on behalf of the respondents. An affidavit-in- reply is filed by Mr.D.C.Mishra, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Gandhinagar. The Court, thereafter, issued rule in the petition on 14.8.2008 and final hearing is fixed today.

4.

Heard Mr. J.P.Shah, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Manish R.

SCA/1030520/2008 4/6 Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue.

5.

Since the appeal is pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad and stay application preferred by the petitioner is also pending, the Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the matter. Interest of justice however, would be served if the directions are given to the Tribunal to dispose of stay application and/or appeal on priority basis. Looking to the peculiar facts of the present case and without citing this order as precedent, we direct the Tribunal to decide

the appeal on or before 15.10.2008. We have been given to understand that the stay application is fixed for hearing on 5.9.2008. It is open for the Tribunal either to take up stay application on that day or to take up appeal for final hearing at any time on or before 15.10.2008. Looking to the issue

SCA/1030520/2008 5/6 involved in the matter it would be in the fitness of the thing to see that the appeal itself get disposed off. Since there is huge demand of more than Rs.17 crores against the petitioner, we direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.50 lacs with the respondent No.2 on or before 26.8.2008. On payment of this amount, the impugned notices at Ex.M and P shall stand suspended and the demand in question shall be stayed till the appeal is decided by the Tribunal. We have shown this indulgence only because this being a Trust constituted by the State Government in accordance with the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sarak Yojana of the Government of India for implementing plans and projects of the State Government as may be approved and sanctioned by Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and National Rural Road Development Agency. It is made clear that the assessee shall not ask for any adjournment when the appeal is fixed for hearing by the Tribunal.

SCA/1030520/2008 6/6

6.

Subject to the aforesaid observation and direction, this petition is accordingly disposed off and rule is made absolute to the above extent without any order as to costs. (K. A. PUJ, J.) (B. N. MEHTA, J.) kks

More judgments on Section 226(3)

All 95 judgments and leading authorities on Section 226(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →