IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11593 of 2010 1. M/S CUBS INTERNATIONAL PETROCHEM LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS INDUSTRIAL UNIT AT B-7, FATUHA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-III, FATUHA, DISTT.- PATA, THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, SHIV SAHAY DUBEY, S/O SHRI SHARDA NATH DUBEY, R/O B-7, FATUHA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-III, FATUHA, P.S. FATUHA, DISTT.- PATNA ……………………………………………….…………Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, BIHAR, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES BIHAR, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA 3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ADMINISTRATION) PATNA DIVISION, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATNA CITY EAST CIRCLE PATNA CITY, PATNA 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES PATNA CITY CIRCLE, PATNA 6. THE COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICER, PATNA CITY CIRCLE, PATNA…………………………………………………………..Respondents. ----------- 03/ 13-Aug-2010 Heard the parties. 2. The authorities of Commercial Tax Department, Government of Bihar have attached bank account of the petitioner-firm because of its failure to deposit the penalty amount imposed pursuant to order dated 15.9.2009 passed by the Assessing Officer for the period 2008-2009 for imposition of VAT. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the appellate authority which is said to be 2 pending as Appeal Case No.ST/PCE-25/2009-10 before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, (Appeal), Patna East and West Circle, Patna. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said appeal which has been preferred after depositing the required amount is not being taken up and therefore petitioner is not being able to file a stay petition and claim stay, because the learned Joint Commissioner is ill and has not been able to attend to his official duty for the last two months. 5. Learned AAG-3 appearing for the State has obtained instruction and submits that the concerned Joint Commissioner who is to hear the appeal was ill but he has sent intimation that he shall be joining his office on 25th of this month. On that basis it has been submitted on behalf of the State that this Court should not enter into merits of the matter and even the prayer for release of the seized bank account of Allahabad Bank, Kolkata, Main Branch, Kolkata should be considered by the appellate authority as and when a stay petition is filed by the petitioner. 6. We made enquiries to find out whether the 3 State has been able to recover any money from the seized account for deciding whether we should grant any interim relief even for four weeks or not. It appears that presently there is no money in the account and on behalf of the petitioner it has been submitted that the account in question is an over draft account and if its operation is kept attached the petitioner-firm would lose heavily in its business ventures and such loss will not help either of the parties. It has been offered on behalf of the petitioner that he shall furnish bank guarantee for the amount of penalty remaining due i.e. Rs. 6,97,061/- and on such bank guarantee being furnished the attachment of the bank account should be withdrawn by the department even temporarily for some period, till petitioner’s prayer for stay can be considered by the appellate authority. 7. On hearing both the parties, we are of the view that petitioner should press this matter before the appellate authority as soon as authority is available. However, we are persuaded to grant relief to the petitioner for a limited period of four weeks. In case, the petitioner deposits bank guarantee of Rs.6,97,061/- within a week, in 4 that event the bank attachment should be withdrawn by the competent authority only for a period of four weeks. If during the said four weeks, petitioner is granted any relief by the appellate authority then the matter shall be governed by such order otherwise the attachment of bank account shall be revived by the Department and the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner shall be refunded. 8. The writ petition is disposed of. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)