Gujarat High Court
Mahindra Holidays And vs State Of Gujarat & on 24 July, 2013
Author: M.R. Shah
Bench: M.R. Shah
MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS AND RESORTS INDIA LIMITEDV/SSTATE OF GUJARAT C/SCA/7631/2013 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7631 of 2013 ================================================================ MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS AND RESORTS INDIA LIMITED & 1....Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: NANAVATI ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 2 MS MAITHILI MEHTA A.G.P. for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 2 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI Date : 24/07/2013 ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.00. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for AN appropriate writ, order and/or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned notice dtd. 20/3/2013 (Annexure-A).
2.00. At the outset, it is required to be noted that at the relevant time when the present Special Civil Application was preferred challenging the impugned notice of demand, it was the case on behalf of the petitioners that without any determination of liability and/or passing the assessment order, the impugned notice of demand dtd. 20/3/2013 has been issued. Considering the above, the Division Bench passed the following order on 26/4/2013.
Draft amendment is allowed.
Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner no.1 is a company engaged in operating holiday timesharing. Its members utilize various properties on a certain predeposit, without paying the room rent. There are also paid customers other than timesharing members, who pay room charges/occupancy charges. On such charges, luxury tax is already paid. The respondents have raised a huge demand of Rs. 31.12 lakhs [rounded off] without indicating any basis. Under its communication dated 20th March 2013, the petitioners were granted time upto 31st March 2013, failing which it is threatened that coercive measures will be taken.
Notice returnable on 3rd May 2013. Respondents shall not take coercive measures for recovering the amount indicated in the impugned order {Annexure A } dated 20th March 2013.
Direct service is permitted.
3.00. Today, when the present Special Civil Application is taken up for further hearing, it has been pointed out that thereafter and during the pendency of the present petition, the authority has already passed an order of assessment determining the liability, against which appeal is provided before the appellate authority.
4.00. As during the pendency of the present petition, order of assessment has been passed against which appeal is provided before the appellate authority, Mr.K.S. Nanavati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with a liberty to challenge the subsequent order of determination of liability and assessment before the appellate forum. However, has requested to continue the ad-interim relief granted earlier for a further period of four weeks so as to enable the petitioners to approach the appellate forum and submit an appropriate application for interim relief.
5.00. In view of the above, present Special Civil Application is disposed of as withdrawn with above liberty. So as to enable the petitioners to approach the appellate authority / forum and submit an appropriate application for interim relief, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ad-interim relief granted earlier is directed to be continued for a further period of four weeks from today. However, it is clarified that the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties, more particularly, the respondents herein and to submit before the appellate authority not to grant the stay during the pendency of the appeal. As and when such a stay application is made, the same be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with law and on merits and without in any way being influenced by the present extension of ad-interim relief. It is also observed that as we have not entered into the merits of the case and/or expressed anything on merits in favour of either of the parties, all the contentions which may be available to the respective parties are kept open which be considered by the appellate authority / forum in accordance with law and on its own merits.
6.00. With this, present Special Civil Application is disposed of. Notice is discharged.
(M.R.SHAH, J.) (MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) Rafik.
Page 3 of 3