TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the civil court upheld. - 26 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2009 - PRAKASH KRISHNA J. Suyash Agrawal for the petitioner. Shambhu Nath Chopra for the Department. JUDGMENT PRAKASH KRISHNA J.- The present writ petition is directed against the order dated September 22, 2006, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. 2. It is not in dispute that M/s. Raja Ram Kishan Chand (HUF) was a defaulter of income-tax dues. In recovery of the said dues, the Department attached property No.110, Ward-7, Mohalla Pakki Sarai, Mirzapur. The attachment was effected on November 7, 1973. The petitioner who happens to be the daughter-in-law of Raja Ram allegedly purchased the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he suit has been upheld up to this court. Thereafter, it appears that an appeal was preferred before the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad. The said appeal was earlier dismissed in default and review application was filed, which also was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a writ petition in this court being Writ Petition No. 1033 of 2002. This court by the judgment dated May 25, 2006, directed the Commissioner of Income-tax to decide the objection flied by the petitioner on the merits. In compliance with the aforesaid order, the matter was again placed before the Commissioner of Income-tax who after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed the impugned order dismissing the appeal. 3. Shri Suyash Agrawa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated November 7, 1973, as valid. The only explanation given by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that it was not considered by her to be a document material for the decision of the present writ petition. The said explanation is wholly inadequate and is not acceptable. Evidence must have been led before the civil court by the respective parties and the civil court has decided the case on the merits after due consideration of the evidence and upheld the attachment order, which was challenged in appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax. The order passed in Suit No.157 of 1983, has been confirmed by this court. Definitely, the said order is relevant and material to the controversy involved herein. 7. Even otherwise also, I do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
