Zuari Maroc Phosphates Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 2 And 10 Ors
High Court
02 Mar 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcbgoa
Parties
Zuari Maroc Phosphates Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 2 And 10 Ors
Date of order
02 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Zuari Maroc Phosphates Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 2 And 10 Ors, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO. 137 OF 2009
ZUARI MAROC PHOSPHATES LIMITED
... Petitioner
VersusTHE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2 AND 10 ORS., ... Respondents
Mr. P. J. Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate with Mr. S. D. Padiyar, Advocatefor the petitioner. Mr. S. R. Rivonkar, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5.
P.C.
-Coram:P. B. MAJMUDAR &U. D. SALVI, JJ.-Date:2nd March, 2009
The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the appealwas heard by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) long back, yetthe appeal is not disposed off finally and in the meanwhile, the property ofthe Petitioner is sought to be attached by issuing garnishee notices, by theTax Recovery Officer. It is submitted by Mr. Pardiwalla, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that as long as the appeal is notdisposed off, further proceedings cannot be taken out for the purpose ofexecuting the Order. Mr. Rivonkar, learned Counsel appearing forrespondents No.1 to 5, on the other hand, submitted that in case thedecision is against the petitioner, the petitioner may move this Court.
2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It is not indispute that the appeal is pending before the Appellate Commissioner. Under such circumstances, we permit the petitioner to approach theappellate Commissioner by preferring an application for stay of therecovery proceedings. If such an application is preferred before theappellate Commissioner, within a period of three weeks from the date of
receipt of such application, the Commissioner shall decide the saidapplication in accordance with law and may dispose off the applicationexpeditiously and within a period of three weeks from the date of receiptof such application. The appellate Commissioner may either dispose offthe matter wholly or may dispose off the stay application within theaforesaid period. Till the decision is taken on the stay application, nocoercive steps shall be taken for the purpose of recovering the saidamount by the Recovery Officer. No further proceedings shall beinitiated for the purpose of executing the Order in question. It is needlessto say that the appellate Commissioner shall dispose off the applicationwithin the aforesaid period and after the decision of the Commissioner onstay application, and in case the Commissioner decides the entire appealwithin the aforesaid time against the petitioner, the said order shall not beimplemented for a period of one week thereafter and no coercive stepsshall be taken against the petitioner, so as to enable the petitioner to takeout appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Petition is disposedoff in the aforesaid terms.
P. B. MAJMUDAR, J.
ssm.
U. D. SALVI, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.