1970 (3) TMI 25

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal dated 4th October, 1966, made in Revision No. 281 of 1965 (H.L.R.) by which the Tribunal, while allowing the revision petition, cancelled the attachment and sale proclamation of the properties belonging to the 1st respondent, Dandi Mohamad Hussain. The matter arises in this way : The 1st respondent filed a revision petition before the Mysore Revenue Appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ully attached and brought to sale by the revenue authorities. On the said petition, the Revenue Appellate Tribunal set aside the attachment of the properties of the 1st respondent holding that the 1st respondent is not the assessee and he is not a defaulter. At the hearing before the Tribunal, the Income-tax Officer was set ex parte and, therefore, a review petition was unsuccessfully filed and it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It would also follow that the unsuccessful party, the claimant or the income-tax department, as the case may be, will have the right to file a suit to establish the right claimed by either : vide C. Dhanalakshmi Ammal v. Income-tax Officer, Madras. Without preferring a claim petition before the Collector, the 1st respondent has approached the Revenue Appellate Tribunal to deal with his claim, and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X