S.K.Sen, C.J. - (1.) The petitioner-company having its registered office at New Delhi and in respect of which winding up proceeding is pending in Delhi High Court, has moved this writ petition challenging the notice dated February 28, 2002, directing the petitioner-company to deposit the amount of Rs. 21,34,593 as trade tax due against the writ petitioners since 1994-95 to 1996-97.
(2.) The contention of Sri Manish Goyal learned counsel for petitioner is that there is automatic suspension of the proceedings under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") and as such complying with the said Section 22, the notice being in the nature of a distress proceeding, the notice should be stayed. It is, however, on record that all stages of inquiry and other proceedings before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction are over and learned counsel for petitioner also cannot dispute that the matter has been sent to the High Court under the relevant provisions of the said Act and winding up proceeding is pending under Section 20 of the said Act. Section 20 of the said Act provides as follows : "20. Winding up of sick industrial company. (1) Where the Board after making inquiry under Section 16 and after consideration of all the relevant facts and circumstances and after giving an opportunity of being heard to all concerned parties, is of opinion that the sick industrial company is not likely to make its net worth exceed the accumulated losses within a reasonable time while meeting all its financial obligations and that the company as a result thereof is not likely to become viable in future and that it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up, it may record and forward its opinion to the concerned High Court. (2) The High Court shall, on the basis of the opinion of the Board, order winding up of the sick industrial company and may proceed and cause to proceed with the winding up of the sick industrial company in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) (3) For the purpose of winding up of the sick industrial company, the High Court may appoint any officer of the operating agency, if the operating agency gives its consent, as the liquidator of the sick industrial company and the officer so appointed shall for the purposes of the winding up of the sick industrial company be deemed to be, and have all the powers of, the official liquidator under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956). (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (2) or Sub-section (3), the Board may cause to be sold the assets of the sick industrial company in such manner as it may deem fit and forward the sale proceeds to the High Court for orders for distribution in accordance with the provisions of Section 529A, and other provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)."
(3.) The fact remains that proceedings for winding up of the sick industrial company under Section 20 is pending in Delhi High Court. That itself shows that all proceedings by way of inquiry or otherwise were already concluded in the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction. The first and foremost contention of Mr. Goyal is that there is automatic suspension under Section 22 of the Act cannot have any application in the present case and the reliance placed by him on the judgment and decision in the case of Gram Panchayat v. Shree Vallabh Glass Works ltd. [1991] 71 Comp Cas 169 is misconceived. The Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision held that as soon as inquiry under Section 16 of the Act is ordered by the Board various proceedings set out under Sub-section (1) of Section 22 would be deemed to have been suspended and no proceeding against any of the property of the company could be proceeded further except with the consent of the Board.;