9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1964, issued a notice to the petitioner directing him not to pay the amount due from him to the respondent No. 5 but to pay the same to the Income-tax Officer. On December 31, 1964, another notice was issued by the Income-tax Officer to the petitioner requiring him to appear before him on January 30, 1965. The suit, however, ended in a consent decree for an amount of Rs. 45,000 on June 28, 1965. The petitioner, who was liable under the decree to the respondent No. 5, who was the original defaulter, was deemed to be a defaulter within the meaning of section 226(3)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Thereafter, a recovery certificate was issued by Income-tax Officer and he sent it to the Tax Recovery Officer, who was a Tahsildar in the present case. After attachment of the property of the petitioner and the sale-proclamation, etc., sale was held on August 31, 1966, which brought Rs. 46,500 as sale proceeds. The petitioner then applied for setting aside the said sale under rule 61 of Schedule II of the Income-tax Act. This application was not accompanied by any deposit of the arrears for which the petitioner was held liable. By an order dated October 4, 1966, the Tax Recovery Officer (T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le 86. This clause reads as under : " (1) An appeal from any original order passed by the Tax Recovery Officer under this Schedule, not being an order which is conclusive, shall lie-- (a) in the case of a Tax Recovery Officer, being a Collector or an Additional Collector or an officer referred to in sub-clause (iii) of clause (44) of section 2, to the revenue authority to which appeals ordinarily lie against the orders of a Collector under the law relating to land revenue of the State concerned." A Tax Recovery Officer under section 2(44) means : " (i) a Collector or an Additional Collector ; (ii) any such officer empowered to effect recovery of arrears of land revenue or other public demand under any law relating to land revenue or other public demand for the time being in force in the State as may be authorised by the State Government, by general or special notification in the official gazette, to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer ; (iii) any gazetted officer of the Central or a State Government who may be authorised by the Central Government, by general or special notification in the official gazette, to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer." U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ided to the revenue authority to which an appeal of an application for revision would ordinarily lie, if the order passed by him were the order under the law relating to land revenue or other public demand for the time being in force in the State concerned. The right of appeal against the order of the Tax Recovery Officer is given by rule 86 of the said rules. Under the law relating to land revenue, an appeal from the order of the Tahsildar would lie to the Sub-Divisional Officer. As in section 41 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, under clause (b) of rule 86(1) an appeal against the instant order of the Tax Recovery Officer would lie to the Sub-Divisional Officer. Such appeal was filed by the petitioner and has been dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Officer on merits. It is, however, contended on behalf of the petitioner that a second appeal lies further against the order in appeal by the Sub-Divisional Officer and a further revision would lie against the order of the second appellate court to the Commissioner, by virtue of the provisions of section 41 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code. It is no doubt true that in cases arising under the laws relating to land revenue a second appeal is pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nother instance, where the Tax Recovery Officer is a Collector, then the appeal would lie to the Commissioner. What is, however, seen from the two provisions providing for the appeal is that only one appeal is provided in either case, whether it be to the Commissioner or to the lower authority. If the statute gives only one right of appeal, the litigant cannot claim any further right and he must be restricted only to the right which has been given to him under the statute. In its wisdom the legislature has provided for only one right of appeal whether the matter falls under clause (a) or clause (b). We are, therefore, unable to accept the contention on behalf of the petitioner that in cases falling under clause (b) of rule 86(1), there is a further right of appeal and revision to the Collector and the Commissioner, respectively. In our view, the Deputy Collector with revenue appellate powers as well as the Commissioner took the correct view that no further appeal was maintainable against the appellate order of the Sub-Divisional Officer and no revision was maintainable against the order of the Deputy Collector with revenue appellate powers. Another contention has been raised on b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
