2025 (10) TMI 601

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2787/2025 3. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the impugned order dated 20th February, 2025 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/Avato Ward 113(Special Zone), Zone 12, Delhi (hereinafter 'impugned order'). The present petition also challenges the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 27th November, 2024 (hereinafter 'impugned SCN') issued for the financial year 2020-21. Vide the impugned order the tax demand raised against the Petitioner is Rs. 59,05,232/- and the total demand including interest and penalty is Rs. 1,09,02,348/-. 4. Additionally, the present petition also challenges the following Notifications: ● Notification No. 40/2021- Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y. Thus, the impugned order has been passed without hearing the Petitioner. 10. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is willing to go in appeal, subject to the outcome in Sarens (supra), by which the impugned notifications have been challenged. 11. Heard. The Court has considered the matter. Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 has an embargo on an un-registered firm from filing a suit or any proceeding for enforcement of a right. The same reads as under: "69. Effect of non-registration.-(1) No suit to enforce a right arising from a contract or conferred by this Act shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner in a firm against the firm or any person alleged....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pplied by this Court in the cases of Haldiram Bhujiawala and Purushottam (supra).We may take note of the principles vividly exposited in the case of Haldiram Bhujiawala (supra) that to attract the bar of Section 69(2) of the Act of 1932, the contract in question must be the one entered into by firm with the third-party defendant and must also be the one entered into by the plaintiff firm in the course of its business dealings; and that Section 69(2) of the Act of 1932 is not a bar to a suit filed by an unregistered firm, if the same is for enforcement of a statutory right or a common law right." 13. Therefore, Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act, 1932 cannot place a bar to a suit filed by an unregistered firm, if a statutory or common l....