BEHARI LAL RAMCHARAN KOTHI Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner applies under Article 226 of the Constitution against recovery proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer and the T ax Recovery Officer.

(2.) THE petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on banking and cloth business. For the purpose of recovery of income-tax dues, the Tax Recovery Officcr, Income-tax, Kanpur, attached the petitioner's immovable properties on January 27, 1967, and this was followed by a notice dated February 7, 1967, for setting the sale proclamation with a view to their sale. THE petitioner objected to the recovery proceedings, but the proceedings have not been, dropped. THE petitioner contends that the recovery proceedings are illegal because no tax remains due from the petitioner, that in any event there is no recovery certificate to support the recovery proceedings and that no notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, was ever served upon the petitioner. THE petition is opposed by the respondents.

(3.) A recovery certificate under Section 222 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is a document forwarded by the Income-tax Officer to the Tax Recovery Officer certifying the amount of arrears due from an assessee. It is a certificate on receipt of which the Tax Recovery Officer is obliged under the section to proceed to recover from the assessee the amount specified therein. The letter of January 15, 1967, assumes that a recovery certificate has already been issued, because it desires to know from the Tax Recovery Officer what action has been taken for recovering the tax arrears. We are of the definite view that the letter of January 15, 1967, cannot be described as a recovery certificate.