Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 :

Section 15/16 and 22 (1)/Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947; Section 13- A-Sick Industry-Arrears of Sales Tax Recovery of Consent of Board Creditors' remedy-High Court held there could be no protection from attachment On appeal, held no coercive recovery of arrear of sales tax without obtaining consent of the Board Creditors' remedy is protected for period of deferment and such period is excluded in computing the period of limitation.

Constitution of India, 1950: Article 39/Entry 52 of List I/Entry 54 of. List II of Seventh Schedule-Held, Central Act does not impair or interfere with the rights of States to legislate in respect of sales tax under Entry 54 of List II.

Words & Phrases:

"Any other Law"-Meaning of Section 22(1) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985.

The appellant was declared a sick company under the Sick Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (Central Act). On a reference under S.15 of the Act, an inquiry under s.16 was made and a scheme for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction was sanctioned by the Board. The appellant was in arrears of sales tax. Recovery of the arrears was sought to be made by attachment of the appellant's property under Section 13-A of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (State Act).

The appellant intervened in a writ petition in which the High Court was considering the question whether steps taken for recovery of sales tax under s.13-A of the State Act were in the nature of proceedings by way of execution, distress or the like contemplated by s.22(1) of the Central Act.

The High Court held that Section 22(1) of the Central Act would not protect the properties of Industrial Companies from being proceeded against in exercise of the power under s.13-A of the State Act. An appeal made in the High Court to review its decision in the light of Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. & Ors. [1990] 1 SCR 966, was rejected. Hence the present appeals.

It was contended on behalf of the appellant that this Court had dealt with proceedings for recovery of dues under a State Act and had come to the conclusion that Section 22(1) of the Central Act would apply.

The contention of the respondents was that Section 22(1) of the Central Act should be so read as not to interfere with the exclusive powers of the State to legislate under Entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution in respect of sales tax. It was further contended that the words 'any other law' in s.22(1) of the Central Act must be so read as to exclude all laws on List II subjects.