Home Case Index All Cases SEBI SEBI + HC SEBI - 2022 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1415 - DELHI HIGH COURTRecovery proceedings - attachment orders - real owner of property - objection regarding the maintainability of the present petition - alternate statutory remedy available to Petitioner under Section 15T read with Section 28A of the SEBI Act, 1992 and Rule 26 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 - HELD THAT:- Writ would lie before this Court only there is a jurisdictional error in the impugned order. The Court is however unable to agree. The Petitioner’s primary objection, is that the attached property belongs to Kuber Floritech Ltd. [Petitioner] and not Kuber Planters Ltd., against whom the recovery certificate has been issued. SEBI was not satisfied with Petitioner’s claim on merits and therefore this Court does not find any jurisdictional error to entertain the petition. Moreover, as pointed out by Ms. Anand, Rule 11 of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961, applicable to the proceedings under dispute, provides complete mechanism of investigation by the Tax Recovery Officer for adjudication of any claim or objection to attachment or sale of any property in execution of a certificate. The aforesaid Rule is a complete code in itself. Moreover, as acknowledged by the Petitioner and recorded in the order there is an alternate statutory remedy, available with the Petitioner under Section 15T read with Section 28A of the SEBI Act, 1992 and Rule 26 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition. Dismissed along with other pending applications. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open. The Court has not examined the merits of the case and, in the event, the Petitioner were to take recourse to alternate statutory remedy, the concerned authority shall adjudicate the claim of Petitioner, uninfluenced by any of the observations made above.
|