High Court instructs fresh application submission for quashment order on deposit, considering undue hardship faced by industry. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh disposed of the petition seeking quashment of an order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 10 Lacs under Section 129 ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
High Court instructs fresh application submission for quashment order on deposit, considering undue hardship faced by industry.
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh disposed of the petition seeking quashment of an order directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 10 Lacs under Section 129 E of the Act. The Court noted that the appellate authority did not consider the undue hardship faced by the industry. The petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to file a fresh application before the authority, which must consider Section 129-E provisions after providing a hearing opportunity. The petitioner was instructed to submit the application within four weeks, and the interim order would remain in effect until a decision is made.
Issues involved: Quashment of order directing deposit of amount by petitioner u/s 129 E of the Act.
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh heard a case where the petitioner sought quashment of an order directing them to deposit Rs. 10 Lacs, passed by the appellate Tribunal. The petitioner's counsel argued that the liability before the Tribunal amounted to approximately Rs. 69 Lacs, but due to the industry being closed and declared sick and registered before the BIFR, no amount was deposited. The counsel requested the petition to be allowed and the impugned order set aside. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel opposed the prayer and requested dismissal of the petition.
The Court noted that Section 129 E of the Act deals with industries facing undue hardship, which was not considered by the appellate authority while passing the order. In light of the circumstances, the petition was disposed of with a direction for the petitioner to file a fresh application before the authority. The authority was instructed to decide on the application considering the provisions of Section 129-E after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The Court specifically directed the petitioner to submit the application within four weeks. Until a decision is made, the interim order passed by the Court would continue in effect. With these directions, the petition was disposed of by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
