9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, of which 25 per cent. income is utilised for charitable purposes and the remaining 75 per cent. accrues to its beneficiaries, Smt. Gulab Bai and Tarabai. A notice under section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure was sent to the defendants before filing the present suit. The plaintiffs filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 47,196 from the respondents on the averments that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 illegally obtained from the account of the plaintiff trust in respondent No. 3-bank, a sum of Rs. 36,063, even though there were no tax dues against the plaintiff trust. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the Union of India and the Income-tax Officer, in their written statement averred that the Income-tax Tribunal had set aside the assessment framed against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act, 1961, barred the jurisdiction of the civil court and, therefore, the suit itself was not competent. The learned single judge, accordingly, dismissed the suit on the ground that in view of section 293 of the Act, the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain such a suit. Hence, this Letters Patent Appeal has been filed. Learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that for the purposes of jurisdiction, only the averments in the plaint have to be looked into and in any case the issue of jurisdiction can be tried only as one of the issues. According to learned counsel, the appeal ought not to have, therefore, been dismissed on such a preliminary issue. It is clear from the pleadings of the parties that the plai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n recourse to section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, in relation to dues pertaining to various assessments of the two beneficiaries of the trust as also the trust. Section 293 creates a bar of suit against the proceedings taken or order made under the Act, and, therefore, the action of defendant No. 2, being in the nature of an order or proceeding under the Act, the suit was not maintainable. It was, therefore, not necessary for the learned single judge to consider the appeal on other issues and the judgment and decree do not call for any interference. In the result, this appeal is dismissed and the judgment and decree of the trial court as also of the learned single judge are affirmed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
