Remanded

Dutt India Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Goods and Services Act (Vat),Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2018WP/279/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge division held that attaching the petitioner's bank account without prior opportunity to represent was unjustified. It directed the Joint Commissioner to grant a personal hearing and pass a speaking order within one week, setting aside earlier coercive measures.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to appear for a personal hearing; the Joint Commissioner was directed to pass a speaking order within one week without being influenced by the attachment warrant.

Dutt India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Goods… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

906-WPL-230-18.doc

¶2

SKC

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 230 OF 2018

¶5

Shri Dutt India Pvt. Ltd. versus The Commissioner of Goods and Services Act (VAT) Maharashtra & Anr.

¶6

..Petitioner

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

Ms Nikita Badheka with Mr. Parth Badheka for Petitioner. Mr. Himanshu Takke – AGP for State.

¶9

CORAM: S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI HARISH DANGRE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 23RD JANUARY, 2018

¶11

P. C. :

¶12

1] It is stated that there is an attachment levied on the bank account of the petitioner though the petitioner is not an assessee in default. The petitioner is also not a debtor owing any sum in money to the assessee in default. In fact, the petitioner has to recover huge amounts from the dealer / assessee in default. Therefore attachment levied to the extent now and so as to recover the amount of tax, interest and penalty from the assessee in default but on petitioner's bank account is unjustified, illegal and in utter breach of the principles of natural justice.

¶13

2] After having heard both sides, we find that there are disputed questions of fact. We do not know what would be the impact and legal consequences of an inter se arrangement between the petitioner and the dealer / assessee in default. We do not know the nature of the transaction. In our limited writ jurisdiction, we do not wish to go into this

1 of 2

SKC

906-WPL-230-18.doc

SKC

factual dispute. It would be for the petitioner to convince the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax who it is now stated by the learned AGP would hear them and pass a speaking order.

¶19

3] We have taken note of the serious grievance of the petitioner that before any coercive measures were taken they had no opportunity to represent or put forward their version and case before the Authorities under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. Once the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax has agreed to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order then all that we direct him is to pass this order as expeditiously as possible and within a period of one week from the conclusion of the hearing. The petitioner has agreed to appear before him on 24^th January 2018 at 11.00 a.m. The Joint Commissioner shall comply with our directions and without seeking any extension of time, he shall pass a speaking order without being influenced by any earlier action including the warrant of attachment or the contents thereof.

¶20

4] The writ petition is disposed of by clarifying that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the rival contentions.

¶21

(SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.)

¶22

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶23

Chandka

¶24

2 of 2

¶25

SKC

Dutt India Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Goods and Services Act (Vat),Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dutt India Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commissioner of Goods and Services Act (Vat),Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Pams Industries Vs the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai Zone-I

Aman Medical Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner Central Excise and Service Tax Daman Commissionerate

Commissioner of Central Excise Pune III (New Pune- Iv) Vs Kumar Housing Corporation Ltd.

M/S Total Management Services Vs Commissioner of Central Excise Pune

Padmashri Dr. D. Y. Patil Ssk Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Central Excise

Wipro Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik