2018 (12) TMI 1464 - HC - Income Tax

Provisional attachment orders made u/s 132 (9B) - Held that - This Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the impugned attachment and find out as to whether such attachment was validly made or not, for the simple reason that considering such question does not arise now, since, as on today, the very impugned attachment itself ceased to have effect after the expiry of a period of six months from the date of the said order in view of Section 132(9C). It is admitted by the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent that so far no fresh attachment is made under any other provision of Income Tax Act in pursuant to the impugned attachment proceedings. When such being the factual position, the fact remains that the impugned attachment proceedings have already become infructuous, as the time for its existence namely six months has already expired on 07.08.2018 and 25.08.2018, as admitted by the first respondent himself in the counter. Therefore, without expressing any view on the correctness or otherwise of the order impugned in these writ petitions, these writ petitions are disposed of by observing that the impugned attachment proceedings ceased to have any effect on and from 07.08.2018 and 25.08.2018 respectively as contemplated under section 132(9C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging attachment of properties under section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. Attachment of Properties: The writ petitions challenge the attachment of properties under section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The impugned orders attached bank accounts and immovable properties of the petitioners. The petitioners argue that the attachment proceedings are illegal and should be quashed as they are not allowed to operate their bank accounts or deal with the properties. The petitioners rely on the expiration of six months from the date of the order as per sub-clause 9C of Section 132 of the Act to support their contention that the attachment orders should be set aside.

2. Legal Arguments: The petitioners' counsel argues that the impugned attachment proceedings are illegal based on the provisions of section 132(9B) and (9C) of the Income Tax Act. The counter affidavits filed by the respondents mention the specific period of effectiveness of the provisional attachment orders under section 132(9C), stating that the attachments ceased to have effect after six months from the date of the orders. The respondents argue that the prayer in the writ petitions has become infructuous due to the clear terms of sub-section 9C of Section 132.

3. Judicial Decision: The court, after hearing both sides, notes that the impugned attachment orders have ceased to have effect after the expiry of six months from the date of the orders as per Section 132(9C) of the Income Tax Act. The court refrains from delving into the merits of the attachment or its validity, as the attachments have already become infructuous. The court observes that no fresh attachment has been made under any other provision of the Income Tax Act, confirming the cessation of the impugned attachment proceedings. Consequently, the court disposes of the writ petitions by stating that the attachments ceased to have effect as of specific dates in August 2018, in accordance with the law.

4. Conclusion: The court's decision is based on the clear statutory provision of Section 132(9C) regarding the period of effectiveness of provisional attachment orders made under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act. The court emphasizes that the impugned attachment proceedings have become infructuous due to the expiration of the specified time period, and no further action is required. The writ petitions are disposed of without any costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.