High CourtsDivision Bench(1997) 03 GUJ CK 0016

Jethmal Bhagwandas Shah vs Tax Recovery Officer and Another

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 21 March 1997 · Citation: (1998) 231 ITR 637

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.A. Mehta, Acting C.J. · R.K. Abichandani, J
CASE NUMBER
Special Civil Application No. 2381 of 1997

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 271 words

R.A. Mehta, Actg. C.J.

1.

At the request of the parties the matter is disposed of finally today.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner wants quashing of notice for settlement of sale proclamation dated February 4, 1997, informing the petitioner that March 31, 1997, has been fixed for proclamation of sale and settling of terms and conditions thereof. Even before that date, on March 12, 1997, proclamation for auction of the properties to recover the Income Tax dues has been issued, which includes the present petitioner. As far as the present petitioner is concerned his property could not have been included in the proclamation dated March 12, 1997, inasmuch as notice for settlement of sale proclamation dated February 4, 1997, has been issued to the petitioner.

3.

In that view of the matter, the proclamation dated March 12, 1997, so far as the petitioner''s properties are concerned cannot be allowed to operate and the petitioner''s properties cannot be allowed to be auctioned in pursuance of the notice dated March 12, 1997. It is made clear that the authorities are free to proceed in accordance with law after settling the proclamation in pursuance of the notice issued to the petitioner, where the date for fixation of terms and conditions of the proclamation is fixed at March 31, 1997.

4.

The petitioner has also contended that he has made an application for waiver of interest, which application can also be decided before the property is put to auction and respondent No. 2 shall decide the waiver application before the date of auction. This petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.