Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 222

Income-tax---Recovery of tax---Attachment and sale of proprety---Tax Recovery Officer---Proclamation of sale---Objection by mortgagee of property, namely, State Bank of India---Tax Recovery Officer must consider claim of mortgagee Batik on merits---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.222; Sched.II, R.11. The petitioner-bank granted credit facilities to two assessee against equitable mortgage of immovable properties. In the case of one of them, the bank had filed a mortgage suit. Meanwhile the income-tax liability of the assessee was assessed for recovery of which certificate proceedings were instituted before the Tax Recovery Officer. The Tax Recovery Officer after attachment of the properties in question issued a sale proclamation. The petitioner-bank filed its claim/objection before the Tax Recovery Officer. The Tax Recovery Officer, on the opinion of standing, counsel and without hearing the bank, summarily rejected its claim, observing that the claim was filed unnecessarily to delay the proceedings, In the ocher case, the bank had already obtained a decree against the assessee, but its claim; was rejected by the Tax Recovery Officer. On writ petitions: Held, that the provisions, of rule 11 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, are akin to the provisions of rules 58 to 63 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as they stood prior to the 1976 amendment. The provisions of rule 11 of the Second Schedule to the Act, therefore, have to be interpreted in the same manner as the erstwhile provisions of rules 58 to 63 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The terms of these provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure a third party objecting to the attachment of the property could either file a suit or prefer a claim before the execution Court, which the execution Court was required to decide, albeit summarily, upon evidence, subject to the decision of the Court in the suit which could be preferred under rule 63 against such decision of the execution Court on the claim. Although the adjudication was confined to the question of possession, the nature of possession of the -debtor, if any, was also required to be decided. In the present- case, 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