Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


M/S Kartar Carrier (P) Ltd v. Addl. Commissioner, Trade Tax & Others - WRIT TAX No. 1358 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 4118 (6 October 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 10

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1358 of 2005

M/s. Kartar Carrier (P) Ltd.


Additional Commissioner, Trade Tax, Ghaziabad Zone,

Ghaziabad & Ors.


Hon. A.K. Yog, J.

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

Heard Sri Suyash Agrawal advocate along with Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri S.P. Kesarwani learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

No notice need be sent since all the respondents are represented by Sri S.P. Kesarwani, learned Standing Counsel and it is agreed at the bar that the writ petition may be finally decided considering the grievance of the petitioner raised in this petition.

The sole grievance raised by the petitioner in the present petition is that notice under Registered Case No. 604/ACII/KOT/2005 was issued by the Court of Sri G.D. Mehmi, Assistant Collector Grade II, Room No. 1, 1st Floor, Old Court Complex, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi-6 demanding a sum of Rs. 10,33,351/- plus interest on account of U.P. Trade Tax with direction to deposit the same on or before 23.9.2005 failing which further action for recovery of the dues was proposed. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that an application dated 20th September, 2005 was filed by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner, Trade Tax, Ghaziabad through his advocate Sri Brajesh Jauhari (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) and another application addressed to Sri G.D. Mehmi, Assistant Collector dated 23.9.2005 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) was filed requesting for staying recovery of the aforesaid amount i.e. 10,33,351/- plus interest from the noticee meanwhile on the ground that his application praying for information and relevant documents was pending before the Additional Commissioner, Trade Tax, Ghaziabad. In the application dated 20th September, 2005 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) petitioner through his counsel contended that there was no adverse order of outstanding dues towards trade tax and he was not aware of any such notice before passing the order requiring the deposit of trade tax. On that basis, it was mentioned that notice ought to have been given to him before initiating any coercive process for recovery of the amount mentioned in the aforesaid notice. The petitioner further mentioned that the order for recovery be recalled and further requested for giving requisite and relevant information/documents on the basis of which recovery order was issued.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the application which he had filed before the concerned Authority, he is under threat of coercive method being adopted including arrest for recovery of the aforesaid amount even though the concerned Trade Tax Authority is not furnishing any information/documents to enable the petitioner to ascertain his liability, if any.

In view of the above, we direct that the concerned Competent Authority shall furnish information/documents including any orders in connection therewith, as may be desired by the petitioner in writing, within ten days of the receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition (and its annexures) provided the certified copy of the order as stipulated above is filed on or before 21st October, 2005. The petitioner, may if he is so advised, seek remedy before a proper Forum against any orders holding him responsible for payment of Trade Tax with respect to the aforesaid amount of Rs. 10,33,351/- plus interest but further action pursuant to the notice (Annexure 1 to the petition) shall not be taken for a period of three months from today or till an order is passed by Trade Tax Authority or Court before expiry of the aforesaid time.

The petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.

Let a certified copy of this order be made available to the learned counsel for the petitioner within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.

Dt:- 6.10.2005



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.