Bhattad Complex,Kantha Rathe, v. 1.The Asst.Commr. (Ct),
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.09.2016
CORAM:
THE HON 'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.23181 of 2004 and W.M.P.No.28048 of 2004 Bhattad Complex, Kantha Rathe Rep.by its Power of Attorney Holder, Mr.Ram Narayan Bhattad, 30, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014.
..Petitioner -Vs1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Zone VI, Chennai.
2.The Commercial Tax Officer, Esplanade I Assessment Circle, Chennai.
3.Ramesh Kumar Bhattad, 30, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai 14.
4.Harikishan Bhattad 30, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai 14.
(R4 impleaded as per order dated 17.12.2004 in W.M.P.No.37263/04) .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in Form 5 RC.2163/2002 A3 dated 14.4.2004 and quash the same is illegal, and pass order forbearing the respondents his men, agents, servants or anyone claiming under them from in anyway attaching the property i.e. 50% of the share in No.30, West Cott Road, Royapettah, Chennai-14.
For Petitioner :No Appearance For Respondents :Mr.K.Venkatesh Government Advocate [R1 & R2] No Appearance for R3 & R4
ORDER
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.
2. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner challenges the notice in Form No.5 RC.2163/2002 A3 dated 14.04.2004, by which it appears that there is an attachment on the property of the petitioner, in which the petitioner claims 50% share. At the time, when the writ petition was entertained, this Court, while considering the stay application passed the following order on 26.08.2003, which reads as follows:
"There shall be interim order as prayed for until further orders.
Mr.Manoharan Sundaram, learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) takes notice for RR1 & R2. Notice to R3. For counter and disposal post on 09.09.2004. However, it is made clear that if the auction had already taken place on 23.06.2004, then confirmation of the sale, if not already done, shall alone stand deferred until further orders."
Thereafter the miscellaneous petitions came up for hearing on 15.03.2005, wherein, this Court by passing the following order, vacated the interim order, which reads as follows: "By the impugned notification dated 03.05.2004, the first and second respondents have notified the attachment of the property detailed therein in order to realise a sum of Rs.4,62,35,099/- being the tax due both under TNGST as well as the CST for the assessment years 1990-91 to 1997-98. While the tax liability is of the order of Rs.1,47,87,550/- the surcharge, additional surcharge, additional tax and penalty works out for the balance amount. In such circumstances, merely based on the technical stand of the petitioner in stating that the property involved is a joint family property and that the share of the fourth respondent is to a very limited extent are not the
concern of the respondents 1 and 2. Such a stand taken by the petitioner is solely with a view to prevent the State from recovering the huge tax liability which is due and pending right from the assessment year 1990-91 to 1997-98. Therefore, I do not find any bonafide in the claim of the petitioner and I also do not find any justification to continue the order of interim stay any further as that will deprive the State from recovering the tax arrears by taking appropriate proceedings by following the due process of law. The interim order dated 26.08.2003 in WPMP.No.28048 of 2004 therefore, stands vacated. WPMP No.2789 of 2005 is dismissed."
3. Thus, as on date, the petitioner has not placed any materials before this Court as regards the present position nor the respondent Assessing Officer has given any instructions to the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. Hence, this Court is not inclined to adjudicate the matter, which has become academic.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the respondents authority, if still there is a need to do so. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar.
/true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar.
To 1.The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Zone VI, Chennai.
2.The Commercial Tax Officer, Esplanade I Assessment Circle, Chennai.
W.P.No.23181 of 2004 MG (CO) MD : 22/09/2016