URBAN HEIGHTS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE action of the respondents in attaching the petitioner's current account maintained with the second respondent -Bank as well as withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 6,07,682/ - from that account and notice dated 25 -10 -2013 issued by the first respondent to the second respondent -Bank are assailed in this writ petition. A direction is also sought against the second respondent -Bank to deblock petitioner's current Account No. 64076019778. Briefly stated, the facts are that the petitioner is engaged in development of real estate. One of the partners in the petitioner's partnership firm is Sri Hemansu M. Shah and he is also a partner in M/s. Ambience Projects, which is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner has a current account with the second respondent -Bank bearing No. 64076019778. It is also stated that Sri Hemansu M. Shah also holds a separate personal account with the second respondent -Bank. In respect of assessment year 2005 -2006, M/s. Ambience Projects was reassessed under Section 39(2) read with Section 69(1) of the Act and an order dated 20 -9 -2013 was passed reassessing the tax liability of M/s. Ambience Projects to an extent of Rs. 1,14,38,391/ - including interest and penalty. Consequently, a demand notice was issued to M/s. Ambience Projects calling upon them to make the aforesaid payment within ten days of service of the notice. Another notice was issued by the first respondent to the second respondent -revenue to pay the outstanding dues in the account of Sri Hemanshu M. Shah. This was on the premise that he being a partner in M/s. Ambience Projects who had dues with the first respondent could be collected from the petitioner -partnership firm, wherein Sri Hemanshu M. Shah was also a partner. In this context, several correspondence between the parties have taken place. Ultimately, the first respondent through the second respondent -bank has freezed the current account bearing No. 64076019778 of the petitioner -firm. That action is assailed in this writ petition.

(2.) I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate who appears for respondent 1 and learned Counsel for respondent 2 and perused the material on record.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents supported the action taken by contending that it was the only way by which the dues could have been recovered from petitioner -firm in which Sri Hemanshu M. Shah was also a partner in the firm.