9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent : Sri. M Thirumalesh. Adv. For R1 & 2 JUDGEMENT:- In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have called in question, the order dated 28.2.2013, passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-J. 2. By the impugned order at Annexure-J, provisional attachment order has been passed by the first respondent directing the assessee i.e., the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner contended that there is no transfer of property and therefore, there is no tax liability. The impugned order and its extension cannot be sustained in law as it is devoid of reasons. He placed reliance on the decisions reported in ITR 1979 page 852 and ITR 2000 page 169. 6. As against this, the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the writ petition itself is not maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed is one of the petitioners. Therefore, the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents will not help him. 8. Insofar as the contention of the petitioners as to whether there is transfer of property, whether there is tax liability, it cannot be gone into in this writ petition. The Assessing Authority by order dated 28.2.2013 has passed provisional order of attachment. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
