9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other petition but application for variation of the order granted in Writ Petition has to be done in proceeding in that petition, if the grounds for variation at all exist - prima facie, it appears that all facts which are being urged would have been considered when the order dated 6 Feb. 2008 was passed as all the facts now urged were in existence even on 6 Feb. 2008 when the order was passed – Decided against Assessee. - Writ Petition No. 1288 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 2-7-2014 - M. S. Sanklecha And G S Kulkarni,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Jhaveri For the Respondent : Mr. A. R. Malhotra ORDER P. C. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks following directions to the Commissioner of Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 226(3) of the Act served upon the Reserve Bank of India was withdrawn on 29 August 2007. 3. However, the notice dated 22 August 2006 under Section 226(3) of the Act issued to Bank of Baroda continued to subsist, an order dated 30 November 2007 was passed by the Tax Recovery officer directing the Bank of Baroda to pay over to the Income Tax Department a sum of ₹ 7.04 crores. Thereafter, Bank of Baroda filed a writ petition in this Court challenging the order dated 30 November 2007 and the notice dated 22 August 2006 in Writ Petition No.395 of 2008. On 6 Feb.2008, the Writ Petition No.395 of 2008 was admitted and the Tax Recovery Officer was restrained from taking any recovery proceedings against the Bank of Baroda in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion being Writ Petition No.395 of 2008 in this Court and obtain a stay of the notice dated 28 August 2006 and order dated 30 November 2007 under Section 226(3) of the Act. It is submitted that in view of the Income Tax Department acting in an arbitrary manner and allowing Bank of Baroda to obtain a stay of the demand on it, immense prejudice is being caused to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, he submits that amount of ₹ 3.94 crores which are admittedly with Bank of Baroda belonging to the petitioner should be taken and paid over to the Income Tax Department and that credit for the same be given to the petitioner. 5. We find that the petitioner has failed to pay his income tax dues for Assessment Year 1993-94 to1997-98. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
