1. - The petitioner was served with a notice Annx.4 dated 10.1.1995 calling upon him to deposit the tax outstanding against M/s. Diamond Marbles Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs. 2,40,837 in respect of Assessment Years 1981-82 to 1984-85 on account of dues under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act.

2. The petitioner challenges the said notice, inter-atta, on the ground that the assessing authority has no authority to issue such notice to the petitioner who has purchased the assets of M/s. Diamond Marbles Pvt. Ltd. which included plant and machinery and other assets constituting its industrial unit at an auction held by the Rajasthan State Financial Corporation in exercise of its powers Under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, because M/s. Diamond Marbles (P) Ltd. has defaulted in paying its dues to it. He relied on principle Laid by the Apex Court in Isha Marbles v. Bihar Electricity Board, (1995) 2 JT 626 .

3. In their return, the Assessing Officer has relied on the provision's of Section 9 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 and decision of the Karnataka High Court in Alpha Silicones v. ACTO (1990) 77 STC 68 alleging that the petitioner being the transferee of the industrial unit owned by M/s. Diamond Marbles Pvt. Ltd. is liable for the recovery of sales tax dues outstanding against the transferor company M/s. Diamond Marbles Private Ltd. and the assessments of the later company can be followed in the hands of transferee.

4. The petitioner has also challenged a consequential notice issued Under Section 11-A attaching the bank account of the petitioner assessee vide Annx. 5 dated 6.4.1995 which the assessee had with Bank of Baroda, Kankroli Branch.

5. The facts about the transfer of the assets of Diamond Marbles Private Ltd. which are not in dispute are that at an auction held on 29.8.1987 at the instance of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation in exercise of its powers Under Section 29, the petitioner purchased the assets compendiously known as the industrial unit owned by M/s. Diamond Marbles Pvt. Ltd. for a sum of Rs. 40 lacs and in pursuance thereof an agreement of sale between Rajasthan Financial Corporation and the petitioner was executed in which the list of assets transferred to the petitioner company was appended as schedule. The petitioner has not purchased any stock-in-trade which was already hypothecated with the bankers of the Diamond Marbles and the assets purchased by the petitioner were free from all encumbrances except charges of the Corporation (RFC & RIICO) and were only subject to the condition that if any there is any outstanding against the Diamond Marbles to Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Public Health Engineering Deptt. and the RIICO shall be cleared by the petitioner. No further liability was passed on to the petitioner. It is, in these circumstances, the petitioner contends that what he has purchased are assets of M/s. Diamond Marbles but not the business of the Diamond Marbles, and therefore, it is not a transferee of the business of the Diamond Marbles within the meaning of Section 9 whether wholly or partly, and therefore, no liability of Diamond Marbles except to the extent undertaken by it under the agreement can be pursued against it as the transferee of the assets of the company.

6. Section 9 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 reads as under

9. Liability on transfer of business or on discontinuance or dissolution of business of a firm, etc. (1) When the ownership of the business of a dealer liable to pay tax is entirely transferred, any tax payable in respect of such business and remaining unpaid at the time of the transfer, shall be payable by the transferee, as if he were the dealer liable to pay such tax; and the transferee shall also be liable to pay tax on the sale or purchase of goods effected by him with effect from the date of such transfer and shall within 30 days of the transfer, apply for registration unless he already holds a