Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2020 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 731 - HC - Indian LawsProcedure for recovery of tax - contention urged by the petitioner is that as per the provisions contained in the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act as made out in the procedure for recovery of tax, (the Rules applicable for recovery under the SARFAESI Act), the 1st respondent cannot conduct a resale without repaying the amount remitted by the petitioner etc - HELD THAT:- A mere glance of the provisions contained in Rule 58 of the Rules in terms of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, which deals with the procedure for recovery of tax (which has been made available for recovery under SARFAESI Act) as well as Rule 9(5) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 framed under the enabling provisions contained in SARFAESI Act would clearly mandate that in default of payment by the purchaser within the period mentioned in the Rule, the deposit may, if the Tax Recovery Officer thinks fit, after defraying the expenses of the sale, be forfeited to the Government and the property shall be resold and the defaulting purchaser shall forfeit all claims to the property or to any part of the sum for which it may subsequently be sold. Similar provisions are also made out in Rule 9(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement)Rules, 2002. In the light of the above said provisions contained in the above said Rules, it is only to be held that the above said contentions of the petitioner that he is legally entitled to get refund of the deposit made by him etc., is absolutely bereft of any merit and lacks any substance. Accordingly, it is only to be held that the above said prayers made by the petitioner in the above said Writ Petition are not tenable or sustainable. In that view of the matter, it is ordered that the above said Writ Petition (Civil) will stand dismissed.
|