Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 667 - HC - Income TaxAppealability of order under Rule 86 - appeal against an order of the Tax Recovery Officer confirming the sale - Held that:- As decided in Subash Chand Goyal Versus Tax Recovery Officer And Others [2002 (2) TMI 75 - ALLAHABAD High Court] - an appeal would lie against an order of the Tax Recovery Officer confirming the sale - The decision proceeds on the basis that, for the purposes of Rule 86, an appeal would lie from any original order passed by the Tax Recovery officer, which is not in the nature of an order that is conclusive, and, therefore, an order by the Tax Recovery Officer confirming the sale, not being one that is made conclusive under Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, the order would be an appealable order for the purposes of Rule 86. The act of confirmation of sale by the Tax Recovery Officer is in terms of Rule 63 of the Second Schedule - when an order of sale is passed by the Tax Recovery Officer, a person aggrieved by that order cannot bypass the requirements in the Schedule, by not preferring an application to set aside the sale and then opting to challenge the order passed under Rule 63, confirming the sale - To allow a person to do so, would do violence to the procedural scheme contemplated in the Second Schedule – there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the CCIT on the maintainability of an appeal, against the order confirming the sale in this case – Having sold her interest over the property to a third person, the petitioner effectively lost her right to maintain a challenge against the actions of the Department in an appeal preferred under Rule 86 of the Second Schedule - Decided against the appellant.
|