IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Mohammed Salih and Ors. – Respondents
WA No. 1413 Of 2024
Decided On : 27-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
(Sathish Ninan, J.)
Is cash in a Bank account 'property' liable to attachment under Section 281B of the Income Tax Act, 1961(“the Act”)? On the discussions in this judgment we hold, 'Yes'.
2. On 12.04.2022, the police seized a huge amount of cash (Rs.1,56,00,000/-) from a car in which respondents 1 and 2 in the writ appeal were riding. The seized amount was produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court.
3. On application by the Department under Section 132A of the Act, the Court directed release of the amount to the Department. Respondents 1 and 2 herein and others challenged the said order before this Court in Crl.M.C. Nos.5605/2022 and 5591/2022. This Court as per order dated 21.12.2023, directed release of the cash to them on furnishing a bond for the amount. The amount was accordingly released.
4. Upon investigation and being satisfied that there was no explanation for the cash nor was it accounted, and after recording reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, proceedings were initiated in relation to the same by the issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act.
5. Finding that the expected demand on assessment including penalty would be a substantial amount exceeding two crores, the payment of which the assessees would evade, the competent authority of the Department, ordered provisional attachment of the Bank accounts of the assessees as per Exts.P7 and P8 orders of attachment under Section 281B of the Act. The said orders were challenged in the writ petition. The writ petition was allowed, against which the Department is in appeal.
6. We have heard Sri.A.R.L. Sundaresan, Additional Solicitor General assisted by Sri.Navaneeth N. Nath, Standing Counsel-IT, for the appellants and Sri.P. Reghunathan, learned counsel for the respondents.
7. Allowing the writ petition and quashing the provisional order of attachment, the learned Single Judge held: -
(ii) The interest of the revenue stood secured by the security furnished before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court.
(iii) The records do not reveal that the opinion of the assessing officer and the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(PCIT) to order provisional attachment was on due application of mind.
8. Section 281B of the Act reads thus: -
(2) Every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of six months from the date of the order made under sub-section (1) :
Provided that the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, Principal Director General or Director General or Principal Director or Director may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the aforesaid period by such further period or periods as he thinks fit, so, however, that the total period of extension shall not in any case exceed two years or sixty days after the date of order of assessment or reassessment, whichever is later.
(3) Where the assessee furnishes a guarantee from a scheduled bank for an amount not less than the fair
Cash in a bank account is considered 'property' liable for provisional attachment under Section 281B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
, time can be extended for a further period of six month. Appropriate order for extension of period of provisional attachment would only be passed upon satisfaction of the criteria listed out. An inj....
Provisional attachment under Section 83 of GST Act invalid without proper officer forming and recording opinion, based on tangible material, that it is necessary for revenue protection prior to order....
The court emphasized the need for strict compliance with the statutory pre-conditions for the exercise of the power of provisional attachment under Section 110(5) of the Customs Act.
Provisional attachment of bank accounts under GST Section 83 is invalid absent recorded opinion based on tangible material showing necessity to protect revenue; strict compliance mandatory, non-adher....
The necessity of the formation of opinion by the Commissioner, the live nexus to the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue, and the existence of tangible material before the Co....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.