Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1932 2010 SLD 1932 (2010) 321 ITR 285
Madras High Court
W. P. No. 6536 OF 2003., FEBRUARY 1, 2010
M. VENUGOPAL, J.
G. Bharadwaj and Ramasami K. for the Respndent.

Subashree

v.

Canara Bank

Law:

Section:

Section 226 of the Income-tax Act 1961 - Collection and recovery of tax - Other modes of recovery - Block period 1987-88 to 1997-98 Where assessee's husband was assessee in default and Assessing Officer, as per section 226(3), had attached fixed deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs belonging to assessee for recovery of arrears of tax of her husband, as petitioner had, in law, an effective and efficacious remedy by approaching tax authorities concerned to redress her grievance in manner known to law, then, it was not open to petitioner to file a writ challenging attachment of fixed deposit [In favour of revenue] The petitioner was the wife of T. The first respondent/bank by its communication dated 18-2-2003, had informed the petitioner that her fixed deposit for Rs. 10 lakhs lying with the bank was attached by the ITO, in the year 1997 as per section 226(3) in lieu of arrears of income-tax of her husband. The petitioner filed the instant writ. Held that, the assessee's husband was the assessee in default and the Assessing Officer as per section 226(3) had attached the fixed deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs belonging to assessee for recovery of arrears of tax of her husband. When the petitioner had in law, an effective and efficacious remedy by approaching the tax authorities concerned to redress her grievance in the manner known to law, then, it was not open to the petitioner to file a writ challenging attachment of fixed deposit. The letter dated 18-2-2003, of the first respondent-bank addressed to the petitioner could not provide a cementing platform to the petitioner so as to give rise to the cause of action to approach this court under article 226 of the Constitution of India and viewed in that perspective, the writ petition was sans merits. CASES REFERRED TO GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v . ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) (para 9) and Dr. K. Nedunchezhian v. Deputy CIT [2005] 279 ITR 342 (Mad) (para 10). G. Bharadwaj and Ramasami K. for the Respndent. JUDGMENT M. Venugopal, J.- The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings pursuant to the communication in No. MSPR:IT Attachment 2003 GVR…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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