What did the High Court hold?

The Court held that recovery proceedings initiated for tax dues cannot be faulted in the absence of a stay order on the assessment order from the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.

The petitioner received a demand notice and garnishee notices for a disputed tax demand of Rs. 2,08,72,519/-. An appeal against the assessment order was pending before the Appellate Authority.

What were the issues?

Whether coercive steps for recovery of disputed tax demand are permissible when an appeal is pending but no stay has been obtained from the appellate authority.

Shri U A Bhojaraj vs Union of India | Karnataka High Court 2012

-1-

W.P. No.40869/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. G. RAMESH

WRIT PETITION No.40869 OF 2012 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

SHRI U.A. BHOJARAJ S/O LATE SHRI B.P. KOTIAN AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS R/O NO.13, SAPTAGIRI BRINDAVAN FARM, SUBRAMANYAPURA UTTARAHALLI, BANGALORE – 560 061

... PETITIONER (BY SRI N. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE) AND

UNION OF INDIA

BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

NEW DELHI

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

INCOME TAX OFFICE, BANGALORE

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

INCOME TAX OFFICE, BANGALORE

THE INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD 10 (2)

INCOME TAX OFFICE, BANGALORE ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI E.R. INDRAKUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO TAKE THE COERCIVE STEPS

-2-

W.P. No.40869/2012 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR COLLECTION OF DISPUTED DEMAND OF RS. 2,08,72,519/- WITH INTEREST THEREON UNTIL DISPOSAL OF APPEAL BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY VIDE ANN-E AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved of the notice of demand dated 25.09.2012 (Annexure-L) issued to the petitioner and two other garnishee notices dated 28.9.2012 and 1.10.2012 which are produced as Annexures-M & N respectively.

It is not in dispute that as per the assessment order dated 31.12.2010 at Annexure-E, the petitioner is liable to pay a balance tax of Rs.2,08,72,519/-.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that an appeal is filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid assessment order and is pending. He further submits that the petitioner has

-3-

W.P. No.40869/2012 not applied for interim stay of the assessment order before the Appellate Authority. 3. In my opinion, in the absence of stay of the assessment order at Annexure-E, the recovery proceedings initiated at Annexures-L, M and N to recover the tax dues cannot be found fault with. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE BNS

SHRI U A BHOJARAJ vs. UNION OF INDIA

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments