2019 (1) TMI 1500 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – TMI – Attachment of immovable property – recovery of penalty imposed upon the Director from the petitioner company – It was submitted that in the facts of the present case, since no notice as contemplated under rule 4 of the Recovery Rules has been issued upon the petitioner, the question of resorting to the provisions of rule 5 does not arise – Held that:- Issue Notice returnable on 31st January, 2019. By way of ad-interim relief, the respondents are restrained from proceeding further pursuant to the attachment order dated 8.1.2019. – R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1444 of 2019 Dated:- 25-1-2019 – MS HARSHA DEVANI AND DR A. P. THAKER, JJ. For The Petitioner (s) : MR ANAND NAINAWATI (5970) ORAL OR
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
or attaching the property at this stage. 3. The attention of the court was further invited to the provisions of Customs (Attachment of Property of Defaulters for Recovery of Government Dues) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Recovery Rules ), to point out that rule 4 thereof requires the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to authorise any officer subordinate to him to cause notice to be served upon the defaulter requiring the defaulter to pay the amount specified in the Certificate within seven days from the date of service of the notice and intimate that in default, such subordinate officer is authorised to take steps to realise the amount mentioned in the Certificate in terms of the rules. It was submitted that in the presen
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
on the petitioner, the question of resorting to the provisions of rule 5 does not arise. It was further pointed out that rule 6 of the recovery rules requires that the attachment by arrest or distrain of the property shall not be excessive, that is to say, the property attached shall be as nearly as possible proportionate to the amount specified in the Certificate. It was submitted that in the facts of the present case, plot No.6102/10, 4th Phase, GIDC, Vapi has been attached by the respondents, the value whereof runs into crores, for recovery of dues of an amount of approximately ₹ 30,00,000/-, which is clearly in breach of rule 6 of the Recovery Rules. 4. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the peti
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =