TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he question whether the correction of the calculation form attached to the demand notice would itself result in the demand notice becoming ineffective to call for a fresh demand notice need not be determined in these proceedings - - - - - Dated:- 24-3-2006 - Judge(s) : T. S. THAKUR., B. N. CHATURVEDI. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by T. S. THAKUR J.-This writ petition calls in question the legality of a notice of demand and an order of attachment issued by the respondents for recovery of the outstanding income-tax dues from the petitioner. It is common ground that during the pendency of these proceedings, the respondents have through an order of attachment issued by them already recovered the entire amount of tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection reducing the demand to Rs. 73,61,853. An attachment order was three days later issued on March 23, 2005, attaching the petitioner's accounts and FDRs. Based on the said attachment, the outstanding amount was eventually recovered from the petitioner on March 24, 2005the day on which the present writ petition was filed. The petitioner's grievance in the writ petition was that it had not received any demand notice subsequent to the second correction made by the Assessing Officer. It also found fault with the reduction of the period for the payment of the amount of tax from 30 days as stipulated under section 220 of the Income-tax Act to 15 days. It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Assessing Officer even though competent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) who has rejected the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner that it was exempt from payment of income-tax on account of its being a local authority. On some other issues urged before him, the appeal appears to have been allowed. The net result, therefore, is that the petitioner has been held liable to pay income-tax although the actual amount of tax determined against it may undergo a further alteration entitling the petitioner to a refund. It was next argued on behalf of the petitioner that although the current controversy has been rendered academic on account of the subsequent events, yet this court ought to make certain observations about the procedure which the Income-tax Department has been following in the matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
