MANSI GARG Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs:

(2.) Briefly stated, the factual matrix pleaded in the writ petition is as follows. By way of notice dtd. 15/3/2010 issued by respondent no. 2, addressed to one Mr Romesh Sharma, the flat bearing No. FF-II, First floor, Rear portion of premises bearing No. C-28, Mayfair Garden, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the subject flat'), owned solely by petitioners no. 3 and 4 was attached under mistaken belief that the entire property bearing No. C-28, Mayfair Garden, New Delhi is owned by Mr Romesh Sharma, an alleged tax defaulter. Consequent to the impugned notice dtd. 15/3/2010, the respondent no. 3 Sub-Registrar sought a clarification from respondent no. 2 as to whether the petitioners' request for registration of sale deed pertaining to C-28, Mayfair Garden, New Delhi should be kept on hold, despite the fact that Mr Romesh Sharma held interest only in the basement of the said property No. C-28, Mayfair Garden, New Delhi. On getting no response, the respondent no. 3 rejected the petitioners' application for registration of sale deed by way of impugned rejection order dtd. 8/7/2021. Petitioners specifically pleaded having never defaulted on their obligations to pay the income tax. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) As mentioned above, the respondents opted not to resist this writ action. Learned counsel for respondents who appeared on 26/7/2023 in this court submitted on the basis of instructions that in the said property No. C-28, Mayfair Garden, New Delhi, it is only the basement which is owned by Mr Romesh Sharma and that Mr Romesh Sharma has no right, title or interest in rest of the floors of the said property. That being so, the impugned notice dtd. 15/3/2010 issued by respondent no. 2 cannot survive.