SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Mad) 308

R.JAYASIMHA BABU
Noorudin – Appellant
Versus
Tax Recovery Officer – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:P. Radhakrishnan, R. Amizhdhu, R. Thazhalan, Chitra Venkataraman, Advocates.

Judgment :-

R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J.

Rule 68B in Schedule II to the Income-tax Act, 1961, introduced with effect from June 1, 1992, is imperative, and specifies the exact period available to the Revenue, to hold the sale of property attached for recovery of arrears of tax, interest, fine/penalty or any other sum; the period by which it may be extended; the period which is to be excluded while computing the period specified in sub-rule (1), and also sets out the consequence of not holding the sale within the period allowed by the rule.

The consequence is that whatever might have happened or might have been done by an assessee or by the Revenue, if the sale is not held within the period specified in rule 68B, after excluding the period specified in rule 68B(2), the sale cannot be held after the expiry of that period of limitation specified therein and any order of attachment that might have been issued shall be deemed to have been vacated.

Tax Recovery Officers are, therefore, required to be extremely alert and take steps promptly within the time frame provided in the rule. Any failure to do so will result in the Department being disabled from proceeding against the immovable property whic








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top