Gujarat High Court High Court

Shah vs State on 24 September, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Shah vs State on 24 September, 2010
Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/2261/2008	 1/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2261 of 2008
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

SHAH
INDUSTRIES THROUGH GAUTAMBHAI B SHAH - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SALES TAX OFFICER & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
DIPEN A DESAI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. 
MS AMEE
YAJNIK for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 24/09/2010  
 
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)

The petitioner has filed
this petition under Article-226 of the Constitution of India praying
for direction to the Official Liquidator of M/s. ABIR Chemicals
Ltd., for issuance of Form-H to the petitioner firm forthwith. It
appears that the petitioner is also challenging the notice dated
1.1.2008. This notice is produced alongwith the sales-tax assessment
order for the period from 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2004.

This Court has issued
notice on 7.2.2008. Earlier in Civil Application, order was passed
by this Court on 22.10.2008 wherein the Court has recorded the
submission of ARCIL that the record is lying with the Official
Liquidator. In this view of the matter, the Official Liquidator was
joined as party in the present proceeding. Ms.Amee Yajnik learned
advocate appearing for the Official Liquidator states that the
record is not lying with the Official Liquidator. It must be lying
with the ARCIL. In this view of the matter, two contradictory stands
are taken by ARCIL and Official Liquidator. But, on that ground the
petition cannot be adjourned time and again. The petitioner shall
have to pursue its matter challenging the notice and order before
the appropriate authority and petitioner could have raised such
ground before such authority. It is not the function of the Court to
direct any authority to supply Form-H to the petitioner, especially
when they have made their stand very clear that the record is not
lying with them.

In view of above, no
relief can be granted in this petition. The petition is accordingly
disposed off. Notice is discharged without any order as to costs.

(K.A. PUJ, J.) (HARSHA DEVANI, J.)

kks

   

Top