| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1978 SLG 865 1978 SLD 865 (1978) 115 ITR 364 |
Kerala High Court
O.P. No. 3953 OF 1975 MARCH 2, 1978
P. SUBRAMONIAN POTI, J.
C.M. Devan for the Petitioner. P.A. Francis and P.K. Ravindranatha Menon for the
Respondent
O.P. No. 3953 OF 1975 MARCH 2, 1978
P. SUBRAMONIAN POTI, J.
C.M. Devan for the Petitioner. P.A. Francis and P.K. Ravindranatha Menon for the
Respondent
M. Rajagopal
v.
Secretary, State Transport Authority
Law:
Section:
Rule 16, read with rule 51 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Recovery of tax – Private alienation to be void in certain cases – Whether though rule 16(1) provides that it shall not be competent for defaulter to effect transfer mentioned therein, it would only mean that such transfers if made would not operate to defeat revenue and nevertheless such transfer would be good enough and operative between parties who enter into such transfers – Held, yes – Whether where ex – managing partner of firm was in huge arrears of tax and on his death permit and registration certificates for vehicles standing in his name were sought to be transferred in name of current managing partner, namely, petitioner, TRO could not prohibit effecting of such transfer - Held, yes FACTS The petitioner was the managing partner of a firm which was carrying on the business of operation of stage carriage service. All the permits and registration certificates for the vehicles operating in the various routes for the business of the firm were standing in the name of the ex-managing partner of the firm. On his death, the petitioner, as the managing partner of the firm, applied to the State Transport Authority for transfer of such permits and also the registrations of ownership in respect of four stage carriages plying on inter-state routes. The State Transport Authority allowed such application. In the meanwhile the TRO sent a letter to the Regional Transport Officer, requesting him not to permit the transfer of ownership of any of the motor vehicles registered in the name of the ex-managing partner as he was in huge arrears of tax. The petitioner filed the instant petition contending that the said letter of the TRO was incompetent and that the said direction should not persuade the State Transport A uthority to revoke the letter and should not also stand in the way of transfer of ownership of the vehicles in the name of the current managing partner of the firm in accordance with the application submitted by him. HELD Rule 16 does not appear to be one conferring any power on the TRO and, if so, the question of incidental power may not arise. That provision, as is evident from…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492