1972 (11) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uance of the said certificate, the Tax Recovery Officer initiated recovery proceedings. He issued a notice of demand to the defaulter, the said T. M. Abdul Rahim, for the entire arrears under rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, on May 10, 1968. But, as the defaulter had died even on April 17, 1968, the said notice of demand was returned with the endorsement that the assessee was dead. Inspite of this return, the Tax Recovery Officer issued a notice of attachment dated December 26, 1968, in Form No. I.T.C.P. 16 addressed in the name of the deceased defaulter restraining him from alienating seven items of properties said to belong to him. On the same day, he directed the revenue inspector, Ranipet, in Form No. I.T.C.P. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rm No. I.T.C.P. 29 only in February, 1969, long after the attachment was effected and the sale proclamation had been settled in December, 1968. The question is whether the notice of attachment and. the proclamation of sale issued in the names of the deceased defaulter are invalid and, if so, whether subsequent service of the notices of demand on the legal representatives will cure the invalidity of the notices of attachment and the sale proclamation issued in. the name of the deceased defaulter long earlier in December, 1968. Admittedly, all the notices of attachment and the sale proclamation issued in December, 1968, were only in the name of the deceased defaulter and not in the names of his legal representatives. It is well established .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ter February, 1969. Therefore, the earlier attachment and the settling of the sale proclamation made on December 26, 1968, without notice to the legal representatives of the deceased defaulter cannot be held to be in accordance with the rules. Once the Tax Recovery Officer is put on notice of the death of the defaulter, the Tax Recovery Officer has to proceed under rule 85 by initiating or continuing the recovery proceedings against the legal representatives of the defaulter under the Second Schedule for recovery of the amount due from the defaulter. As already stated, in this case the attachment and the sale proclamation have taken place long after the death of the defaulter, but long before the proceedings under rule 85 were initiated aga .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X