MARIA THOMAS Vs. ADDITIONAL SALES TAX OFFICER III

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had availed a business loan from the 2nd respondent Bank during the year 1999 to the tune of Rs.15,00,000/-. According to the petitioner, due to set back experienced in the business activities there occurred default in re-payment on a regular basis. Meanwhile, revenue recovery steps was also initiated for realising arrears of sales tax due with respect to the year 2000-01. It is stated that the property which was mortgaged for securing the loan was attached by the 1st respondent under the revenue recovery proceedings.

(2.) IT is pointed out that, on the basis of approach made by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent had permitted settlement of the loan account on remitting a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- on or before 25.12.2010. Exts.P2 and P3 are the letters issued by the 2nd respondent Bank in this regard. According to the petitioner she had taken effective steps to wipe off the liability by arranging sale of the property. IT is stated that she had already found out a probable buyer and the buyer is prepared to make payment of the amount to enable the petitioner to pay off the liabilities. But since the attachment is continuing the sale could not be materialised, is the contention.

(3.) CONSIDERING the contention of the petitioner that she had already arranged a probable buyer and that the sale could not be materialised only due to the pendency of the attachment, I am of the view that the petitioner can clear payment of the tax amount on the basis of modified orders to be issued by the 1st respondent as directed above. It is evident that once the sale tax arrears is cleared, the petitioner can proceed with the sale and pay off the liability due to the 2nd respondent Bank.