9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 896X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... void as against any claim in respect of any tax payable by the assessee - section 281 did not prescribe any adjudicatory machinery for deciding any question which may arise u/s 281 and that in order to declare a transfer as fraudulent u/s 281, an appropriate proceeding in accordance with law was required to be taken u/s 53 of the Transfer of Property Act - the ITO had exceeded its jurisdiction in adjudicating the matter u/s 281 of the Act – thus, the ITO had no jurisdiction to declare the sale deed as void – decided in favour of Assessee. - Writ Tax No. - 169 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 22-5-2014 - Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala And Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shubham Agrawal For the Respondent : C.S.C., I.T.,S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (234) ITR 118 in which it was held that Section 281 is only a declaratory provision and is not an adjudicatory provision entitling the authority to declare a document as a void document. The petitioner, in support of his submission, also filed documentary evidence, namely, sale deeds of properties sold in the vicinity where the property in question was located relating to the period in question to show that adequate consideration had been passed in the purchase of the land and building. The Income Tax Officer, Muzaffarnagar without giving any opportunity of hearing passed an order dated 11.1.2008 declaring the sale deed as void. The petitioner being aggrieved, filed a Writ Petition No. 4148 of 2008, which was disposed of with a direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion which may arise under section 281 and that in order to declare a transfer as fraudulent under Section 281, an appropriate proceeding in accordance with law was required to be taken under section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act. The Supreme Court held that the Income Tax Officer, in order to declare the transfer void under section 281 and being in the possession of the creditor, was required to file a suit for declaration to the effect that the transaction of transfer was void under section 281 of the Income Tax Act. In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the Income Tax Officer had exceeded its jurisdiction in adjudicating the matter under section 281 of the Income Tax Act. The Income Tax Officer had no jurisdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
