Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax Nodal 9, Mumbai

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1107

DIPANKAR DATTA, M. S. KARNIK, N. J. JAMADAR
Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax Nodal 9, Mumbai – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Rajiv Narula a/w Ms. Mehek Choudhary i/b. Jhangiani Narula and Associates, Mr. Shakib Dhorajiwala a/w Mr. Rushab Chopra i/b. Vidhi Partners, Mr. Venkatesh Dhond-Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjeev Sawant, Mr. Murlidhar Kale, Ms. Garima Joshi, Ms. Juhi Bhogle, Ms Vinodini Shrinivasan Mr Pratik Pansare i/b. OM Gujar Law Chambers, Mr. Ranbir Singh a/w Mr. Nahush Shah i/b. Nahush Shah, Dr. Birendra Saraf-Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Vaibhav Charalwar a/w Mr. Sachin Chandarana a/w Mr. Vijayendra Purohit i/b M/s. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co., Mr. Nitin Deshpande, Mr. J. P. Sen, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Nikhil Rajani, Mr. Apoorva Kulkarni, Mr. Rupak Sawangikar i/b. M/s. V. Deshpande and co, Mr. Charles De’Souza a/w. Mr. Nikhil Rajani, Mr. Apoorva Kulkarni, Mr Rupak Sawangikar i/b. M/s. V. Deshpande and Co., Mr. Nikhil Rajani a/w Mr. Apoorva Kulkarni a/w Mr. Rupak Sawangikar i/b M/s. V. Deshpande and Co, Mr. Charles De Souza a/w Priyansh Jain i/b. M/s. Apex Law Partners,
For the Respondent: Mr. Karan Adik i/b Mr. Padmakar S. Patkar, Mr. D. P. Singh, Ms. Naira Jeejeebhoy, Mr. Himanshu B. Takke, Mr. V. A. Sonpal, Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Mr. Mohamedali M. Chunawala a/w Mr Parshuram S. Gujar i/b. A.A. Ansari, Mr. Rakesh L. Singh a/w. Heena Shaikh i/b. M. V. Kini and Co., Mr P. P. Kakade, GP a/w Mr. B.V. Samant, Mr. P. P. Kakade, GP a/w Mr. M.M. Pable, Mr. P. P. Kakade, GP a/w Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe

JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION

1. A Division Bench of this Court (cor. Chief Justice and M.S. Karnik, J.) while considering this batch of writ petitions was of the view that the issues emerging for decision therein can be advantageously heard and disposed of by a larger Bench. In deference to the order dated 25th November 2021 passed by such Bench and in exercise of power conferred on the Chief Justice by rule 8 of Chapter I of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, this larger Bench was constituted. The parties were put on notice and heard at length on multiple legal and factual issues.

2. The controversy lies in a narrow compass, with the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 (hereafter “SARFAESI Act”, for short) and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act , 1993 (hereafter “RDDB Act”, for short) taking centre-stage. Who between a secured creditor [as defined in section 2(1)(zd) of the SARFAESI Act and section 2(1)(la) of the RDDB Act], and the taxing/revenue departments of the Central/State Governments, can legally claim priority for liquidation of their respective dues qua the borrower/dealer upon enforcement of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1107

DIPANKAR DATTA, M. S. KARNIK, N. J. JAMADARJalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. – AppellantVersusJoint Commissioner of Sales Tax Nodal 9, Mumbai – Respondent

Cases Referred (22)

DIPANKAR DATTA, M. S. KARNIK, N. J. JAMADAR
Jalgaon Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax Nodal 9, Mumbai – Respondent