9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 866 - HC - Income TaxMaintainability of the suit as per provision of Section 293 - Bar of suits in civil courts - remedy of filing appeal under Section 246A-1 - respondent in the present revision is the legal heir of late assessee - HELD THAT - It is apparent that by his suit, plaintiff is trying to challenge the order passed by the Income Tax authorities under the Income Tax Act. The Income Tax in itself is a complete code providing remedies with regard to orders passed under the same. The plaintiff respondent had remedy of filing appeal under Section 246A-1 (j) of Income Tax Act, 1961 with regard to orders of the Income Tax authorities, in case he felt injured from the same. Thus, the suit itself is not maintainable and the court below has wrongly rejected the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the revisionist. Section 293 makes an absolute bar to suit filed in Civil Courts with regard to any proceedings held under the Income Tax Act. In view of aforesaid, the revision is allowed.
Issues:
1. Maintainability of a civil revision against the order dated 19.1.2007. 2. Interpretation of Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding the liability of legal representatives. 3. Challenge to the maintainability of a suit under Section 293 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue 1: The civil revision was filed against the order dated 19.1.2007 passed by the First Additional Civil Judge, which rejected an application questioning the maintainability of the suit filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The respondent, as the legal heir of the deceased, challenged the order of the Income Tax Department regarding tax liability. Issue 2: Section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 imposes liability on the legal representative to pay the amount the deceased would have been liable to pay if alive. In this case, after the Tribunal modified the tax liability, a fresh demand notice was served on the respondent as the legal representative. The respondent then filed a suit for injunction and declaration against the revisionist. Issue 3: The revisionist contended that the suit was not maintainable under Section 293 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which bars suits in Civil Courts related to Income Tax proceedings. The revisionist argued that the respondent had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) under Section 246A-1 (j) of the Act. Citing precedents, the revisionist emphasized the comprehensive nature of Section 293, preventing suits indirectly challenging orders under the Act. The court found that the suit filed by the respondent aimed to challenge orders passed by Income Tax authorities, which the Income Tax Act already addressed with specific remedies. The court held that the suit was not maintainable under Section 293, which prohibits Civil Courts from entertaining suits related to Income Tax proceedings. Consequently, the court allowed the revision, set aside the impugned order, and dismissed the suit as not maintainable.
|
