https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382623 Provisional attachment under the Gujarat VAT Act could be made only against a dealer's property, and recovery from a third party required that person to fall within the recovery provision's limited scope. A lessor who merely owned land and leased it to the defaulting company did not lose separate legal identity protection because common directors existed, so the lessee's tax dues could not be enforced against the lessor's land. The Court also held that the lessor was not an "other person" holding money for or due to the dealer, so the charge and revenue mutation had no legal basis. The attachment and mutation were quashed. en-us Fri, 28 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2020 11:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382623 Provisional attachment under the Gujarat VAT Act could be made only against a dealer's property, and recovery from a third party required that person to fall within the recovery provision's limited scope. A lessor who merely owned land and leased it to the defaulting company did not lose separate legal identity protection because common directors existed, so the lessee's tax dues could not be enforced against the lessor's land. The Court also held that the lessor was not an "other person" holding money for or due to the dealer, so the charge and revenue mutation had no legal basis. The attachment and mutation were quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 28 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382623