9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (1) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the order of Jagannatha Shetty J. in Writ Petition No. 1863 of 1971 (P. Balchand v. TRO [1974] 95 ITR 321), by which a writ of mandamus was issued to the TRO to forbear from recovering tax from the respondent, Balchand, on the basis of the certificate issued by the ITO (Collection), Circle-1, Bangalore. The respondent, Balchand,was a partner of a firm, Hindusthan jewellery Mart, till Novembe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting to be under r. 32 of the Second Schedule to the Act, attaching the amount standing to the respondent's credit in the books of account of that firm. The respondent challenged this action of the TRO as being not warranted by law. The learned single judge held that, as the assessee in default was the firm of Hindusthan Jewellery Mart and the notice of demand had been issued in the name of that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and who is the defaulter can be attached, refers to the term " defaulter " which has the meaning as defined under Sch. II. The term " defaulter " means the assessee mentioned in the certificate. The expression " assessee in default " is also defined under the Act. Section 220 provides that when any amount, otherwise than by way of advance tax, specified as payable in a notice of demand under s. 15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in such certificate, he has no authority to proceed beyond the certificate and to try to enforce the demand against a person whose name does not appear in the certificate. On the facts which are not in dispute, the action of the TRO was clearly unauthorised. The view taken by the learned single judge also finds support from a Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
