1. Mr.M.R.
Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate with Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt, learned advocate for respondent No.2-Income Tax Department, has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2, wherein it is stated in Paragraph-5 that a demand of Rs.32,71,23,634/- for various assessment years as tabulated in the affidavit is receivable from the Company in liquidation.
2. On perusal of the affidavit, it is noticed that the assessment years are 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2004-05. The winding up order for the Company in liquidation was passed on 12.03.2008 in Company Petition No.253 of 2008.
3. The learned Senior Advocate has also taken the Court through various provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the provisions of Sections 529, 529-A and 530 of the Companies Act. On the other hand, Mr.Shalin Mehta, learned advocate for Mr.Hemang M. Shah, learned advocate for respondent No.1, has submitted that the said respondent is a Secured Creditor and in view of the provisions of Section 529-A, he would get preferential payment.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and in view of Sections 529-A and 530 of the Companies Act in relation to the demand for Rs.32,71,23,634/- made by respondent No.2 pertaining to the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2004-05, respondent No.2 may file a further clarificatory affidavit, keeping in mind the above provisions of law.
5. It is stated by the learned advocate for respondent No.1 that an affidavit-in-reply has been filed on its behalf. However, the same is not on the record of the Court. The Registry may place it on record.
List on 04.07.2012.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.) rakesh/ Top