2019 (5) TMI 571

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter was taken up for final hearing today. 3. In this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 19.9.2018 passed by the respondent whereby the property of the petitioner has been attached under the provisions of section 155 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code. 4. The facts as averred in the petition are that the petitioner acquired the property being 4, Golden Tulip Bungalows, TP No.21/FP No.198, Shreyas Foundation, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the "subject property") vide registered sale deed dated 25.3.2008 for a consideration of Rs. 1,15,00,000/-. The said property was purchased from Shri Harishbhai F. Shah, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ectors, is without authority of law. 5.1 In support of his submission, the learned advocate placed reliance upon the decision of a Division Bench of this court in the case of M.R. Choksi v. State of Gujarat, (2012) 51 VST 73 (Guj.), wherein the court held that there is no statutory provision in the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 which empowers the sales tax authorities to fasten the liability of the company on its Director in the matter of payment of sales tax dues. Reliance was also placed upon the decision of this court in the case of C.V. Cherian v. C.A. Patel, (2012) 51 VST 71 (Guj.) wherein the court followed the above referred decision of this court in the case of M.R. Choksi. v. State of Gujarat (supra) wherein action was taken under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat in the present case undisputedly the dues are for the assessment year 2001-2002 and even if the transaction of the property is to be looked into with regard to internal purchase and sale between the present petitioner and her husband and other relatives, which transfer is of the year 2008, the department was justified in attaching the subject property. It was contended that even in terms of section 47 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 since such purchase has taken place after the tax amount had become due, such transfer is void as against the claim of the tax dues of the State. It was submitted that if the dues have arisen, the recovery is permissible to be carried out as per section 49 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act and that....