https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164894 During pendency of proceedings before the BIFR, section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 imposes a statutory bar on coercive recovery action against a sick industrial company. On that footing, the court treated the sales tax recovery notice as unenforceable while the BIFR process remained pending, and indicated that the revenue's remedy was to approach the BIFR for impleadment and permission before pursuing recovery. The contrary precedent relied on was found inapplicable because the demand arose in the context of continuing BIFR proceedings and a deferral arrangement default. en-us Wed, 29 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2014 17:41:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164894 During pendency of proceedings before the BIFR, section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 imposes a statutory bar on coercive recovery action against a sick industrial company. On that footing, the court treated the sales tax recovery notice as unenforceable while the BIFR process remained pending, and indicated that the revenue's remedy was to approach the BIFR for impleadment and permission before pursuing recovery. The contrary precedent relied on was found inapplicable because the demand arose in the context of continuing BIFR proceedings and a deferral arrangement default. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 29 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164894