TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court directs parties to appellate authority for stay application, stresses fair hearing before bank account attachment. Petitioner seeks quashing of attachment order.</h1> <h3>M/s. Afcan Impex Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Gujarat Through The Commissioner Of State Taxes</h3> The High Court refrained from deciding on the merits of the case due to the ongoing appeal process. It directed the parties back to the appellate ... Attachment of Bank Account of petitioner - recovery of the demand raised for the year 2008-2009 - pendency of the second appeal - stay application not decided - HELD THAT:- What is noticed in the instant case is that from October 2020, the petitioner is already before the second appellate authority and without deciding his application for the stay, which was filed in October,2020, the second appellate authority on 19.01.2021 has chosen to invoke its powers under section 44 to attach the bank account. Attaching of the bank account would naturally result into serious consequences which many a times would be not possible to be counted or contemplated. There could not have been any order without availing the opportunity in wake of pendency of Appeal and pending adjudication of an application of stay. While relegating the parties to the respondent Appellate authority, it is directed that the application of stay, if not the entire Appeal, shall be determined on availing due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, within two weeks of the receipt of copy of this order. Petition disposed off. Issues:Challenge to order under Section 44 of the GVAT Act for attaching bank account; Petitioner's business activities and connection to M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd.; Assessment order for the year 2008-09; Appeal process and pending Second Appeal No.280 of 2020; Grievance against bank account attachment during pendency of appeal; Legal rights and actions under Section 44 of the GVAT Act.Analysis:1. Challenge to Order under Section 44 of the GVAT Act:The petitioner contested an order under Section 44 of the GVAT Act, attaching their bank account for recovery of a demand related to M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd. The petitioner, a company engaged in importing and exporting, argued against the attachment citing lack of connection with M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd. and the cancellation of the latter's registration certificate.2. Petitioner's Business Activities and Connection to M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd.:The petitioner, a SEZ unit, acquired the Letter of Allotment from M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd. The petitioner emphasized its lack of involvement with M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd. and its operations, presenting documents to support its claim.3. Assessment Order for the Year 2008-09:The assessment for M/s. Arzee Rags (India) P. Ltd. in 2008-09 resulted in a demand, later reduced in an appeal. The petitioner challenged the demand in a Second Appeal No.280 of 2020, seeking a stay on recovery pending appeal.4. Appeal Process and Pending Second Appeal No.280 of 2020:The petitioner's appeal against the assessment order was pending, with an application for stay. The petitioner raised concerns over the delay in hearing the appeal and the subsequent attachment of the bank account, affecting their ability to present their case effectively.5. Grievance Against Bank Account Attachment During Pendency of Appeal:The petitioner raised objections to the attachment of the bank account during the appeal process, alleging unjustifiable action by the authorities. The petitioner sought relief from the High Court to quash the attachment order and prevent coercive recovery actions until the appeal was resolved.6. Legal Rights and Actions under Section 44 of the GVAT Act:The High Court refrained from delving into the merits of the case due to the ongoing appeal process. It directed the parties back to the appellate authority to decide on the stay application promptly, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and proper adjudication before resorting to stringent actions like bank account attachment.This detailed analysis covers the various issues raised in the legal judgment, outlining the petitioner's grievances, the legal processes involved, and the High Court's directives regarding the pending appeal and the bank account attachment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
