High CourtsFull Bench(2001) 02 PAT CK 0040

Sita Ram Prasad Verma vs Union of India

Patna High Court · Decided on 20 February 2001 · Citation: (2001) 118 TAXMAN 18

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J · Shashank K.R. Singh, J
CASE NUMBER
C.W.J.C. No. 2402 of 2001 20 February 2001

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

4 paragraphs · 203 words

This petition has been filed to quash the notice dated 27-3-2000, Annexure 2, to the writ petition. The notice has been served on the bank where the petitioner has an account. The notice is u/s 281B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''). In addition, the petitioner has also received a notice u/s 158BD of the Act.

2.

The law provides that whatever action the Income Tax Department may take, it must be taken within the time stipulated under the provisions according to which the present action has been taken. There already has been search of the petitioner''s premises. The court cannot hold making an observation that it did inquire from the counsel for the petitioner as to who exactly was the other joint holder in an account which has been referred as number 16565 in reference to Annexure 2(b) to the writ petition. The court did not receive an answer. At this stage, the court is not drawing any conclusions.

3.

All things considered, the notice has been issued under the provisions of the Act and it cannot become the subject-matter of a writ petition as the issue of the notice is neither irregular nor illegal.

Dismissed.