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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 895

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM
P. E. Ramakrishnan - Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 2828 of 1989
Decided On : 08 July 1998

Appearing Advocates: Deokinandan Commissioner. K. M. L. Majele Assessee.

Transferee cannot be absolved from liability from pay with of the arrears of tax.

Headnote:Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1955-Section 23-Provisions of the section are only applicable in case of court auction purchases-Lands transferred by assessee-Held, transferee liable to pay agricultural income tax due from assessee.

Judgment :-

P. SATHASIVAM, J.

The prayer in the above writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the third respondent in Form No. 1 under section 8, namely, the distraint order in proceedings No. PAP/5/R/KDK, dated January 21, 1988, and quash the same and forbear the respondents from taking any proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the arrears of agricultural income-tax due by W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy or his legal representative.

According to the petitioner, one W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy owed several lakhs of rupees to V.R.V. and Company of Kumbakonam and its partners. The said V.R.V. and Company brought a suit against the said W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy in O.S. No. 717 of 1978 in the Sub-Court, Dindigul. Accordingly, the mortgaged properties were brought to sale in a court auction on January 11, 1984, and the petitioner bought the properties in the court auction for a sum of Rs. 1, 20, 105 subject to the mortgages mentioned in the sale deed executed by the court. The petitioner undertook to clear the encumbrances mentioned in the sale deed executed by the court. The said court auction was confirmed on July 3, 1984, and the learned Subordinate Judge, Dindigul, executed a sale deed on July 3, 1984, and thus the petitioner obtained absolute right and title over the property. The total extent of lands purchased in the court auction sale was of an extent of 270 acres and V.R.V. and Company, the partnership firm is managing the lands on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner was a tenant of the lands right from the year 1979 and has been paying the agricultural income-tax regularly, without any default. It is further stated that the legal heirs of the said W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy informed the petitioner that there were arrears of agricultural income-tax to the tune of nearly Rs. 1, 11, 000 and they have already written a letter to the Department on September 30, 1985, to attach the amount of Rs. 1, 27, 000 lying to the credit of O.S. No. 717 of 1979 and further informed the petitioner that the Department would have taken necessary action based on the said letter. However, the Department had not taken any action on the letter given by the legal heirs of W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy for attachment of the amount lying in a court deposit to the credit of O.S. No. 717 of 1978. Immediately, on February 22, 1986, the petitioner wrote a letter to the personal assistant to the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul, bringing the above aspect to his notice. The petitioner was under the bona fide impression that the Government would have taken suitable action to attach the amount lying to the credit of O.S. No. 717 of 1978 and adjusting the same towards the arrears of agricultural income-tax due by the said Ramamurthy. The third respondent has also issued a notice in Form No. 1 under section 8, namely, distraint order, for selling the lands purchased by the petitioner in the court auction. It is further stated that the respondents have no right whatsoever to take any further proceedings in the matter against the bona fide court auction purchaser of the property for value. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petitionOn behalf of the respondents, the Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, Madras-5, has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the petitioner is a partner of the firm, namely, V.R.V. and Company. The firm filed a suit for their debt against one Thiru W. P. A. R. Ramamurthy, who was in arrears of agricultural income-tax from the assessment years 1972-73 to 1980-81 and purchased the entire lands belonging to the said Ramamurty in the court auction. Therefore, the demand notice was issued to V.R.V. and Company under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act calling upon them to remit the tax dues kept in arrears in respect of lands in their possession and enjoyment. It is stated that even on the date of purchase, through court auction, a charge was


















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 Back to top