TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 996
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. By the impugned order, the learned single judge dismissed the writ petition and in consequence declined to grant the reliefs claimed by the writ petitioner in their writ petition. So the question that arises for consideration in this intra court appeal is whether single judge was right in dismissing the appellant's writ petition? At the outset, we may state that both learned counsel appearing for the parties conceded that the controversy involved in the writ petition and now carried in this appeal at the instance of writ petitioner remains no more res integra and answered in writ petitioner's (appellant) favour by the decision of the Supreme Court reported in [2006] 1 JT (SC) 180; [2006] 144 STC 331 (SC) (State of Kar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y "fixed assets" or "running business". It was held that if it is found that what is transferred is only the "fixed assets" such as land, building, plant and machinery, then in such case, the transferee, i.e., successor-in-interest of such fixed assets would not be held liable to pay the old outstanding dues of such defaulting person (seller) in respect of his business, but if it is found that what is transferred is in effect a "running business" along with the assets by such defaulting person, then the transferee, i.e., purchaser of such business would incur the liability to satisfy the old outstanding dues of such defaulting person (seller) as if he himself is a defaulter. This issue was then examined by this court in the case of Commerci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he payment of tax liabilities of defaulting company by the transferee company, whereas such requirement does not find place when we read section 15 ibid. 11. In our opinion, there lies a subtle distinction between the former, if the assets includes transfer of running business of defaulting company, then section 9 would come in operation. In other words, liability of transferee to pay any outstanding dues of defaulting company (dealer) under section 9 ibid. would arise only when it is found as a fact that transferee (purchaser) has purchased 'entire business of the defaulting company', from the defaulting company either directly or in proceedings for sale of such business under any Act. 12. Coming now to the facts of the case,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....outstanding dues of M/s. Jodhpur Auto Agric Products. It is these two demands which were questioned in the writ petition, out of which this intra court appeal arises by the writ petitioner (successor-in-interest), which on its dismissal gave rise to filing of this appeal. In our considered opinion, when it is not disputed that what was transferred to the writ petitioner by the defaulting person through Rajasthan State Financial Corporation in auction held on March 21, 1990 was only the "fixed assets", then by necessary corollary, the law laid down in Shreyas Papers [2006] 144 STC 331 (SC); [2006] 1 JT (SC) 180 and Mecson Marbles (P) Ltd. 26 Tax-Up-Date 6 would apply to this case in their favour on all fours. Since the law in these two ca....