9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 2060 - HC - Income TaxAuction by the Revenue of the attached properties for non-payment of tax - HELD THAT - We accept the undertaking given by the petitioners to this Court that they will pay the costs and charges incurred by the respondents for scheduling the auction on or before 5th March, 2018 subject to the respondents informing the petitioners of the costs by 1st March, 2018. In view of the above, Mr. Thakkar, does not press this petition and seeks to withdraw. Therefore, we have not examined the merits of the petition or the respondents objections to it.
Issues:
Challenge to auction without disposing of objections to property attachment and auction scheduling costs. Analysis: The primary challenge in this petition was against the holding of an auction by the respondent Revenue of attached properties without disposing of the petitioner's objections to the attachment and auction. The petitioners highlighted that they were called for a hearing regarding their objections after the auction date, as per the Notices dated 16th and 20th February 2018. The respondent Revenue agreed to pay the costs incurred for scheduling the auction on 1st March 2018, as informed by Mr. Thakkar, the petitioners' counsel. Mr. Kotangle, the respondent Revenue's counsel, assured that the exact costs for scheduling the auction would be communicated to the petitioners, and they undertook to pay the same by 5th March 2018. Additionally, it was stated that the auction of the attached properties would be adjourned for two weeks from 1st March 2018. The Tax Recovery Officer committed to hearing the petitioners on the Notices issued on 16th and 20th February 2018 on 1st March 2018 at 3:00 p.m. The petitioners agreed to appear at the scheduled time, and the order resulting from the hearing would be communicated to them by 7th March 2018. The petitioners gave an undertaking to the Court to pay the costs and charges for scheduling the auction by 5th March 2018, subject to the respondents informing them of the costs by 1st March 2018. Consequently, Mr. Thakkar decided not to press the petition and sought to withdraw it. As a result, the Court did not delve into the merits of the petition or the respondents' objections, and the petition was disposed of as withdrawn without any order as to costs.
|
