The main legal point established is that provisional attachment made under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ceases to have effect after the expiry of a period of six months from the date of the order, as per Section 132(9C).

W.P.No.30067/2018: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the respondent in F.No:DDIT/U-4(1)/SCL-BTELLP/132(9B)/2017-18/1 in issuing the warrant for attachment of properties under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 26.02.2018 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequently direct the respondent to lift the attachment of the lands belonging to the petitioner.

W.P.No.30086/2018: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in F.No:DDIT/U-4(1)/SCL/132(9B)/2017-18/1 in issuing the warrant for attachment of properties under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 07.02.2018 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequently direct the first respondent to lift the attachment of the bank accounts of the petitioner lying with the second and third respondents.)

Common Order

1. All these writ petitions are filed challenging the attachment of properties under section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. In W.P.No.30061/2018, the first respondent, by way of the impugned proceedings dated 07.02.2018, attached three bank accounts held by the petitioner. In W.P.No.30067 of 2018, the impugned order dated 26.02.2018 attached the immovable properties of the petitioner. In W.P.No.30086 of 2018, the impugned order dated 07.02.2018, attached the bank account held by the petitioner therein.

3. The petitioner in W.P.Nos.30061 and 30067 of 2018 is one and the same, whereas the petitioner in W.P.No.30086 of 2018, is a different person. Since these writ petitions are filed challenging the provisional order of attachment made under section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act,1961, passed by the first respondent, without seeking any relief against the other respondents/Banks and considering the fact that these writ petitions can be disposed of, based on the pleadings raised by the petitioner and the contesting first respondent alone, more particularly, when the other respondents/banks are arrayed only as formal parties, notice to those respondents are dispensed with.

4. The case of the petitioners is that the impugned attachment proceedings are illegal and liable to be quashed as they do not have legs to stand after the expiry of a period of six months from the date of the order, as contemplated under sub-clause 9C of Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, it is contended by Mr. Sivaraman, learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside, since the Bank officials are not allowing the petitioners to operate the respective bank accounts and to deal with the immovable properties, which are the subject matter of attachment in W.P.Nos.30061, 30067 and 30086 of 2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after inviting this Court's attention to section 132(9B) and (9C) of the Income Tax Act, thus, submitted that the impugned orders are to be declared illegal.

5. A separate counter affidavit is filed in each case. Though the counter affidavit has dealt with in detail as to the circumstances under which the impugned order of attachment came to be passed, this Court is not inclined to refer to those contentions, for the simple reason that point to be considered in these writ petitions is as to whether these impugned provisional attachment orders have any life after the period of six months from the date of the order, in view of the specific period of its effectiveness as provided under section 132(9C). Answer to the above question raised by the petitioners is available in the counter by stating that the provisional attachment of the bank accounts and on the properties referred therein under section 132(9B) ceased to have effect after a period of six months which was on 07.08.2018 and 25.0