Law:

Section:

Section 222 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 11 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Recovery of tax - Certificate proceedings - Questions raised by assessee such as non-issuance of demand notice to him and some other questions on merits were not gone into by TRO - Whether TRO's order attaching impugned property was to be vacated and case was to be remitted back to TRO to determine questions raised by assessee - Held, yes Facts Proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act for recovery of tax for certain years proved abortive, on the holding of the revisional authority that the provisions contained in the said Act were not attracted, the relevant provision being those contained in the 1961 Act. Proceedings were thereafter initiated under the Second Schedule to the Act for the recovery of tax in question. Various objections raised by the petitioner to the maintainability of the proceedings and on merits were negatived. On writ the petitioner assailed the order passed by the TRO, inter alia, on the grounds (i) that the demand notices for the years in question not having been served either on the assessee or on his legal representatives, the proceeding for recovery of tax was not maintainable, (ii) the proceeding was not available to be initiated on the basis of certificate transmitted to the TRO by the certificate officer, and (iii) that no enquiry had been conducted to ascertain if the property belonged to the petitioner and if the same was liable to be proceeded against under the law. Held Non-service of demand notice goes to the root of jurisdiction of the revenue officer initiating the proceeding for recovery of tax. Since other questions also urged by the petitioner, in the present case, required investigation into facts, which could appropriately be done only by the original authority, the impugned order was vacated and the matter was remitted to the TRO to determine the questions raised. Dhuliram Swamy for the Applicant. ORDER 1. Heard. With consent of the counsel for the parties, the matter is heard on merits. 2. In this application under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner…

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