9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (6) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd 1977-78 the penalties levied were reduced, by exhibits P2, P3 and P4 orders dated 16th July, 1981. Earlier, in pursuance to the original orders, recovery proceedings were started. The properties of the petitioner were attached on 31st January, 1981. The amount due then was Rs. 21,093.45. Even after the passing of the revisional orders, evidenced by exhibits P1 to P4, recovery proceedings were continued for recovering the same amount. In this original petition, exhibit P6 dated 18th March, 1982 a notice issued under the Revenue Recovery Act in form No. 16 regarding sale of immovable property, is assailed as illegal. The notice (exhibit P6) was in pursuance to the notice of attachment dated 31st January, 1981. The petitioner contends that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner is, that there should be a fresh notice of demand after the decision in the appeal or revision, either modifying or setting aside the original assessment order. According to counsel, the notice of demand issued originally will fade the moment the assessment order is set aside or modified. In this case, the assessment orders have been modified by the revisional orders, by exhibits PI to P4. So, a fresh notice of demand should be issued before further recovery proceedings are pursued. Reliance is placed on the decision reported in Incometax Officer v. Seghu Buchiah Setty [1964] 52 ITR 538 (SC). It is true, that ordinarily if an order of assessment is set aside or modified in appeal or in revision, the notice of demand issued in pursua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of the notice or notices of demand served upon the assessee before the disposal of such appeal or proceeding may be continued in relation to the amount so reduced from the stage at which such proceeding stood immediately before such disposal; ...................................." 3.. A bare perusal of the above statutory provision makes the position clear. It shall not be necessary for the taxing authority to serve upon the assessee a fresh notice of demand after the decision rendered in appeal or in revision, whereby the assessment order is modified or set aside and the amount due is reduced. But under section 3(1)(b)(ii) it is mandatory that the taxing authority shall give intimation of the fact of such reduction to the assessee, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 82 should be annulled. I hereby do so. 4.. In view of section 3(1)(b)(iii) of Act 23 of 1967 the recovery proceedings can be continued in relation to the amount that is found to be due, after the revisions, for which, the proceedings, as it stood on 31st January, 1981 can be continued. I make this position clear. So that, after intimation by the 1st respondent of the reduced amount under section 3(1)(b)(ii) of Act 23 of 1967, if such reduced amount is not paid within a reasonable time, the recovery authorities can proceed under section 3(1)(b)(iii) of Act 23 of 1967 from the stage of attachment. The attachment of the properties dated 31st January, 1981 will be valid and effective for pursuing further, with recovery proceedings, if the amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
