| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1988 SLG 1729 1988 SLD 1729 (1988) 172 ITR 56 |
Rajasthan High Court
M.B. SHARMA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
M.B. SHARMA, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Surinder Nath Kapoor
v.
Union of India
Law:
Section:
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, read with rule 86(1)(c) of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Writ - Maintainability of - Whether in a ease where an appeal under rule 86(1)(c) of principal rules was pending decision, which was an efficacious remedy under Income-tax Act, writ under article 826 against issuance of recovery certificate is maintainable - Held, no Facts Certain income-tax arrears demands were outstanding against two firms as well as their partners. The IAC issued recovery certificates under section 222 to the TRO for execution. The TRO accordingly-initiated the proceedings to recover the two demands by execution of recovery certificates. The aforesaid properties were ultimately auctioned through an auctioneer, and their sale in favour of the purchaser was also confirmed subsequently by the TRO. The petitioner who was partner of one of the aforesaid firms, filed an application under rule 61 for setting aside the sale of the properties to the TRO. This application as well as subsequent review petition filed by the petitioner were dismissed by the TRO. Because the TRO was going to confirm the sale, the petitioner made stay application in the appeal which he filed on 29-3-1986 in Form No. 29A under rule 86(1)(c) before the Tax Recovery Commissioner. While the said appeal was pending, the petitioner filed writ petition under article 226 challenging the issuance of the certificate of recovery, notice of demand and the entire auction proceedings, as illegal, ultra vires and invalid. Held Article 226 is not meant to short-circuit or circumvent statutory procedures. It is only where statutory remedies are entirely ill-suited to meet the demands of extraordinary situations, as for instance, where the very vires of the statute is in question or where private or public wrongs are so inextricably mixed up and the prevention of public injury and the vindication of public justice required so, that recourse can be had to article 226. But then the Court must have good and sufficient reasons to bypass the alternative remedy provided by statute. Surely matters involving the revenue where statutory remedies are available, are not such matters. In theβ¦
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