Wp/1013/2014 Of M/S Maharaja Developers v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Nagpur And 3 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 1013/2014. M/s. Maharaja Developers, Nagpur and others.VERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and others. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders of directionsand Registrar's Orders. Court's or Judge's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARIAND P.R. BORA, JJ. DATED : APRIL 09, 2014. Heard Shri A. Bhoot, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Anand Parchure, learned Counsel for respondents. Properties disclosed that at Annexure-8, 12 in numbers are permanently attached by the respondents towards their dues exceeding Rs. 11 Crores. Challenge to demand on various counts raised by the petitioners is still pending in Appeals before the ITAT, since 2009 for want of /availability of Bench. Shri Bhoot, learned counsel submits that all stock in trade of petitioners are permanently attached and hence, petitioners are not in a position to carry out business to meet their obligations or to reduce their liabilities. He contends that in the process all liabilities continue to mount. He has pointed out that at least on two occasions the department (TRO) has permitted petitioners to sell the properties and revenue generated through such sales has been deposited by the petitioners towards the liabilities. He contends that if the properties mentioned at sr.no.9, 10 and 11 are allowed to be disposed of by the petitioners, petitioners again can deposit back the amount received and meet the liability or reduce their liability. He contends that the petitioners are not accepting the demand as worked out, as it contains interest and penalties.Shri Parchure, learned counsel for respondents, states that all properties are encumbered and therefore, the respondents are not in a position to sell out the same, though the properties are attached. He submits that in this situation, the attachment is bound to continue till the Income Tax liabilities are discharged. He further states that the Bench is not available and hence hearing of appeals could not take place. Looking to the situation, we direct the petitioners to move appropriate representation pointing out encumbered or un-encumbered properties available for sale and also in the alternate, so that his proposals then can be evaluated by the respondents. If the proposal is submitted by the petitioners, respondents shall take such decision upon it within a further period of four weeks independently. We also direct the ITAT, Bombay to arrange for and to decide the appeals filed by the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from today. At this stage Shri Bhoot, learned counsel for petitioner states that ITAT had remanded two appeals which are pending before the CIT Appeals i.e. for the A.Y. 2007-08 and 2008-09 qua the petitioner no.2. The said Authority shall attempt to decide those appeals similarly within a period of eight weeks. With these directions and with liberty to petitioners to approach again, if their grievances is not redressed, we dispose of the Writ Petition. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd