Law:

Section:

Section 46(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (Corresponding to, Section 222(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961) - Collection and recovery of Tax-Certificate proceedings - Assessment years 1943-44 and 1944-45 - Whether when an assessee is in default in making payment of income tax dues and ITO forwards to Collector a certificate of recovery, Collector shall have all powers which a Collector has under Revenue Recovery Act or Civil Court has under CPC for purpose of recovery of amount due under a decree - Held, Yes - Whether a proceeding for recovery shall be deemed to have commenced if some action is taken to recover whole or any part of sum with in prescribed period - Held, Yes - Whether where recovery certificate was issued in name of 'M' who was a karta of assessee - HUF, it was merely a case of mistake or irregularly that status of 'M' as karta was not specified and, it would not render certificate so issued null and void - Held, yes FACTS For the assessment years 1943-44 and 1944-45, ex-parte assessments were competed against the assessee - HUF. Thereafter two demand notices were served on the assessee. Later recovery certificate dated 27-03-1947 was issued against one of the coparceners of the assessee HUF under section 46(2). A second certificate was issued on 11-08-1951. On the basis of this certificate the Collector, attached the petitioner's house on 12-07-1953. According to the petitioner he had already executed a sale deed in respect of his share in the said house in favour of 'K' on 26-11-1951. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was dismissed on the ground that an alternative remedy was available to him. In the meantime the TRO, issued a proclamation of sale on 6-04-1977, and the attached property was sold on 12-05-1977. The petitioner filed an objection under rules. 9 and 11 of the Second Schedule to the Act before the TRO, on 2-06-1977. Respondent dismissed that objection by his order dated 31-01-1979. The petitioner's appeal under rule 86(1)(c) of the Schedule to the Act was dismissed by the Tax Recovery Commissioner. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 was going to take action for confirmation of sale. On writ, the petitioner submitted that this…

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