Law:

Section:

Section 182, read with rule 11, of Second Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Firm - Position prior to 1-4-1993 - Whether where proceedings had already been started by Income -tax Officer under section 182(4) against petitioner-firm, similar proceeding before Tax Recovery Officer under rule 11, of second schedule could not be proceed - Held, yes FACTS One 'D' was partner in the petitioner-firm and had retired from the firm from April, 1971. Certain amount was due and payable by said 'D' as income-tax, penalty etc., which was not paid by him. The Income-tax Officer issued a notice under section 182(4) directing the petitioner to pay tax of a partner to the extent of 30 per cent as contemplated under section 182(4). A similar proceedings under rule 11, was also initiated by the Tax Recovery Officer directing the petitioner to deposit the Income-tax also on account of 'D' and further pay an amount being the rent of the godown. On writ : HELD In view of the fact that the proceedings had already been started by the Income-tax Officer under section 182(4), a similar proceeding before the Tax Recovery Officer under rule 11 could not proceed. It appeared from the notice itself that the Income-tax Officer had already made the determination in terms of section 182(4). That being so, further investigation by the Tax Recovery Officer became unnecessary. Accordingly, the orders passed by the Tax Recovery Officer with respect to the petitioner were to be quashed. JUDGMENT Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J.-This rule is directed against a prohibitory order by which the petitioner was directed not to make any payment to Smt. Panna Debi Agarwal or Sri D.P. Agarwal who retired from the partnership firm in 1975. Certain bank accounts of the petitioner-firm were also attached. On June 9, 1977, such attachment was withdrawn on condition that the petitioner-firm should within two weeks from that date deposit with the Registrar, A.S., of this court a sum of Rs. 19,000 and further pay Rs. 7,500, payable to Smt. Panna Debi Agarwal being the rent of the godown, to respondent No. 1, the Tax Recovery Officer. It is stated by Mr. Chatterjee, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1, that as the…

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