Gujarat State Rural Road Development Agency V. Commissioner of Income Tax & 2

SCA/10305/2008

AI Insights

The Gujarat State Rural Road Development Agency filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the notices issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which demanded payment of arrears amounting to Rs.17,14,19,056 from the petitioner. The petition sought to quash these notices and prevent the recovery of the demanded amount until the disposal of the second appeal. The court granted ad-interim relief to halt coercive recovery and directed the Tribunal to expedite the hearing of the appeal and stay application, emphasizing the importance of the matter due to the significant financial demand against a state-conducted trust under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sarak Yojana.

• Counselvise Citation: [2008] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 672533 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2008
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MAUNA BHATT
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH SHAH
• Keywords: Coercive Recovery; Income tax appellate tribunal; Quashing notices; Stay Application; Pradhan Mantri Gram Sarak Yojana
• Section: 226(3)

Judgement Text

"SCA/1030520/2008 1/6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10305 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY - Petitioner(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MANISH J SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Respondent(s) : 1, DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 2, None for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Date : 22/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ) SCA/1030520/2008 2/6 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing the notices at Ex.M and Ex.P Collectively, whereby the respondent No.2 has issued notice under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 27.6.2008 on the Branch Manager, State Bank of India Main Branch, Gandhinagar and the Manager, Dena Bank as well as the Branch Manager, State Bank of India dated 7.8.2008 to pay forthwith any amount due from the said Banks or held by them, for or on account of the petitioner upto the amount of arrears to the tune of Rs.17,14,19,056/-. The petitioners have also prayed for the direction asking the respondents Nos.1 and 2 not to press and/or recover the said demand till the disposal of the second appeal before the respondent No.3 and to lift attachment notices at Ex.M and Ex.P Collectively. 2. We have issued notice on 12.8.2008 and SCA/1030520/2008 3/6 JUDGMENT considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the averments made in the petition and the submissions of Mr.J.P. Shah ad-interim relief was granted to the effect that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 shall not effect coercive recovery against the outstanding dues and the amounts which are lying in the bank shall not be recovered till 14.8.2008. 3. On service of the notice Mrs.Mauna Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel has appeared on behalf of the respondents. An affidavit-in- reply is filed by Mr.D.C.Mishra, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Gandhinagar. The Court, thereafter, issued rule in the petition on 14.8.2008 and final hearing is fixed today. 4. Heard Mr. J.P.Shah, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Manish R. SCA/1030520/2008 4/6 JUDGMENT Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue. 5. Since the appeal is pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad and stay application preferred by the petitioner is also pending, the Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the matter. Interest of justice however, would be served if the directions are given to the Tribunal to dispose of stay application and/or appeal on priority basis. Looking to the peculiar facts of the present case and without citing this order as precedent, we direct the Tribunal to decide the appeal on or before 15.10.2008. We have been given to understand that the stay application is fixed for hearing on 5.9.2008. It is open for the Tribunal either to take up stay application on that day or to take up appeal for final hearing at any time on or before 15.10.2008. Looking to the issue SCA/1030520/2008 5/6 JUDGMENT involved in the matter it would be in the fitness of the thing to see that the appeal itself get disposed off. Since there is huge demand of more than Rs.17 crores against the petitioner, we direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.50 lacs with the respondent No.2 on or before 26.8.2008. On payment of this amount, the impugned notices at Ex.M and P shall stand suspended and the demand in question shall be stayed till the appeal is decided by the Tribunal. We have shown this indulgence only because this being a Trust constituted by the State Government in accordance with the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sarak Yojana of the Government of India for implementing plans and projects of the State Government as may be approved and sanctioned by Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India and National Rural Road Development Agency. It is made clear that the assessee shall not ask for any adjournment when the appeal is fixed for hearing by the Tribunal. SCA/1030520/2008 6/6 JUDGMENT 6. Subject to the aforesaid observation and direction, this petition is accordingly disposed off and rule is made absolute to the above extent without any order as to costs. (K. A. PUJ, J.) (B. N. MEHTA, J.) kks "