Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 1158 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURTRecovery of dues u/s 226(3) - Mutual fund company directed to pay the amount due to the assessee to the Income tax department - Held that:- The first petitioner in this case may be a person from whom money may become due to the proforma respondent assessee, but the event is not triggered off till such time that the first petitioner receives the notice of redemption from the assessee. In other words, the first petitioner is identified as a person from whom money becomes due to the assessee in future, but the first petitioner’s liability to pay the assessee does not arise till such time that the assessee seeks the payment by applying for redemption of the units. In the circumstances, the first petitioner is under no obligation, till such time that the first petitioner is instructed by the proforma respondent assessee to redeem the units, to make over any money to the Income Tax Officer who has issued the notice to the first petitioner. The first petitioner has, as noticed above, done the next best thing possible. The first petitioner has undertaken not to allow the proforma respondent assessee to transact in the units. There is, thus, an effective order of attachment though the ITO may not be satisfied with the same to the extent the present money equivalent of the units covered by the order of attachment is left open to the vagaries of the market. As a consequence, the respondent authorities are restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioners in respect of any notices issued pursuant to the original notice under Section 226(3) of the said Act dated July 15, 2015 unless the first petitioner is in breach of the undertaking recorded herein and allows the relevant units to be traded.
|