TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in view of section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the respondents could recover sales tax collected by the petitioners after the sanction of the rehabilitation scheme, and to what extent the recovery notices were enforceable.
Analysis: The rehabilitation scheme sanctioned by the Board was under implementation, but the statutory bar under section 22(1) operates only in respect of dues covered by the scheme or liabilities that would frustrate its implementation. Sales tax collected by the sick industrial company after the date of sanction is money belonging to the Revenue and is not protected by the embargo under section 22(1). However, tax collected prior to the date of sanction falls within the protection of the scheme and cannot be recovered contrary to it. Where assessment for later years was pending, recovery was confined first to the admitted liability in the returns and, thereafter, to amounts found due on assessment.
Conclusion: The recovery notices were valid only to the extent of sales tax collected after the sanction of the scheme and the respondents were restrained from recovering tax collected up to the date of sanction; recovery of post-sanction tax and assessed or admitted dues was permitted in accordance with the scheme and assessment orders.
TaxTMI 
