AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.—In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the noting made in the revenue record including regarding khewat No. 111/112, khatauni No. 178 (Annexure P-2), khewat No. 10/46, khatauni No. 12 (Annexure P-5), khewat No. 110/112, khatauni No. 177 (Annexure P-8) by the respondents qua the dues of VAT and central sales tax payable by M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to lift the embargo on the sale property of the petitioners in their individual capacity for non-payment of VAT and central sales tax dues in relation to M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. being a separate legal entity.
The petitioners in their individual capacity had purchased the land measuring 6 bigha 11 biswas situated at village Akbarpur, Tehsil Morinda, District Roopnagar with existing structure thereon from M/s. Manjit Motors Ltd. vide registered sale deed dated 1.6.2007 (Annexure P-1) for a sale consideration of Rs. 27 lacs. The jamabandi for the year 2010-11 (Annexure P-2) shows their ownership and possession over the said land. The said land was leased out to M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. vide registered sale deed dated 25.8.2011 (Annexure P-3) for a period of ten years. Similarly, the petitioners also purchased certain property in village Akabarpur, Tehsil Morinda, District Roopnagar from Shri Manjit Singh vide registered sale deeds dated 9.6.2008 (Annexures P-4/A, P-4/B and P-4/C, respectively). The jamabandi for the year 2010-11 (Annexure P-5) showed their ownership and possession. The said land was also leased out to M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. vide registered lease deeds dated 25.8.2011 (Annexures P-6/A, P-6/B and P-6/C, respectively). The petitioners are owners of the property purchased from Shri Harjit Singh Bala vide registered sale deed dated 10.8.2009 (Annexure P-7) as depicted in the jamabandi for the year 2010-11 (Annexure P-8). The said land was also leased out to M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. vide registered lease deed dated 25.8.2011 (Annexure P-9). M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd. has been fastened with liability to pay tax by respondent No. 2 for the years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2013-14 and the appeals filed against the said liability have been dismissed for non-deposit of 25% of the additional demand against which CWP No. 14024 of 2015 has filed in this Court. This Court has stayed the recovery by coercive steps and reserved the judgment vide order dated 7.9.2015 (Annexure P-10). Respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 9.4.2014 has written to the Naib Tehsildar, Morinda that since a heavy demand of VAT and central sales tax for the years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2013-14 is pending qua M/s. Dutchply Industries Ltd., no sale deed be executed in its favour without informing respondent No. 2. The said letter has been recorded in the jamabandis for the year 2010-11 regarding Annexures P-2, P-5 and P-8 and is a part of the revenue record. Hence, the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since no demand notice claiming the relief as claimed has been filed with the respondents, liberty be granted to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority by incorporating the grievance as raised in the present writ petition, however, direction be issued to the authority concerned to decide the representation expeditiously in a time bound manner in accordance with law.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, the present writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation along with supporting material before respondent No. 2 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. It is directed that in case any representation is filed by the petitioners, respondent No. 2 shall decide the same in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to them within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation.