Back
KARDAK ETE
Pabitra Kumar Hira, S/o. Late Maneswar Hira – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Heard Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Dr. B.N. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department appearing for all the respondents.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the impugned sale notice dated 27.03.2019, whereby immovable property of the petitioner is sought to be put on sale and also the attachment order dated 20.12.2018, passed by the respondent authority on the ground that the impugned sale notice as well as the order of attachment are barred under the provision of Rule 68B of the Schedule II of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. The petitioner is a businessman who is engaged in supply of power tillers and tractors to various Departments of the State of Assam. The petitioner is the proprietor of various firms and filed his income tax returns regularly.
4. In the year 2004, the Assessing Officer made a block assessment of the income of the petitioner and vide order dated 30.12.2004, has stated that concealed undisclosed income of the assessee/petitioner herein was Rs.98.62,670.00 (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Sixty Two Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy) only, for the Financial Year 1996-97 to 200
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application and interpretation of Rule 68B of Schedule II of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which sets a time limit for the sale of attached immo....
Limitation period for tax recovery under Rule 68B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is reckoned from the date of finality of the assessment order, which was confirmed post the dismissal of the special leav....
Point of Law – The power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution is plenary in nature and is not limited by any other provision of the Constitution This power can be exercise....
The validity of property transactions can be affected by the vendor's tax issues, leading to potential void status; bona fide purchaser claims necessitate separate civil proceedings for determination....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act to determine the legality of the sale conducted and the authority....
Rule 68B of the Income Tax Act does not apply to recovery proceedings under the RDDB Act; the limitation period for such recoveries is governed by the Limitation Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Order XXI Rule 32 C.P.C., the attachment of properties will automatically cease after six months unless the decree is satisfied or an ap....
The transfer of property made in violation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Second Schedule to the said Act is void.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
