Gujarat High Court High Court

Income-Tax Department vs Unknown on 20 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Income-Tax Department vs Unknown on 20 April, 2010
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

OJA/8/2009	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

O.J.APPEAL
No. 8 of 2009
 

In


 

COMPANY
PETITION No. 275 of 2008
 

In


 

COMPANY
APPLICATION No. 446 of 2008
 

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

RAJEEV
S MARDIA AND RASIK S MARDIA 

 

Versus
 

OFFICIAL
LIQUIDATOR OF MARDIA STEEL LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) AND ANOTHER 

 

=========================================Appearance
: 
PARTY-IN-PERSON
 
MR ROSHAN DESAI,
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR with MS AMEE YAJNIK for Opponent No.1  
MR
HRIDAY BUCH for Opponent(s) :
2, 
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 20/04/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)

Heard Mr.
Mardia, party-in-person, learned counsel for the Official Liquidator
and perused the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

This Court
feels that notices at this stage be issued to:

1.
Income-tax Department,

The
Chief Income-tax Officer (Gujarat),

Ayayakar Bhavan, Ashram Road,

Ahmedabad-380

009.

2. Sales-tax
Department,

The Chief
Commissioner of Commercial-tax,

Gujarat
State,

Vechan
Vera Bhavan,

Ashram
Road,

Ahmedabad.

3. Central
Excise Department,

The Chief
Commissioner of Central Excise

Gujarat,

Central
Excise Bhavan,

Opp.

Gujarat Polytechnic,

Ahmedabad-380

009.

4. Asset
Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. (Arcil)

Shreepati
Arcade, August Kranti Marg,

Nana
Chowk, Mumbai-400 036.

5. Torrent
Power Limited,

Ahmedabad.

6. State
of Gujarat.

7. Public
notice to workmen of the company, in ‘Gujarat Samachar’ daily
newspaper, because it is informed that there is no Union representing
the workmen of the company, at the cost of the appellant.

The
learned counsel for the Official Liquidator submits that at this
stage, the Official Liquidator is not pressing for issuance of the
notice to any party. His case is that only after hearing the parties
and considering the viability of the applicant, if necessary,
necessary submissions would be made in accordance with the directions
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to issue notice to the concerned
parties.

In view of
the aforesaid, issue NOTICE to the aforesaid party No.1 to 6,
returnable on 30.4.2010, to whom Mr. Mardia has indicated pursuant to
the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, reserving the right of the
Official Liquidator to make a request for issuance of notice at an
appropriate stage.

Direct
service is permitted qua party Nos. 1 to 6.

(BHAGWATI PRASAD, J.)

(J.C.UPADHYAYA, J.)

omkar

   

Top