M U JOSHI Vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Where an immovable property attached for recovery of any tax, interest, penalty or any other sum under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is sold beyond the period of limitation prescribed Rule 68-B of the Second schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, whether such sale is a valid sale is the question raised in this petition.

(2.) The petitioner at the relevant time was a partner of M/s. Joychem chemical and Pharmaceuticals Industries ('the firm' for short). Pursuant to the assessment orders passed under section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act (I. T. Act' for short) for A. Y. 86-87 and 87-88, huge demands were raised against the said firm. Appeals filed by the firm against the said assessment orders were dismissed by C. I. T. (A) and further appeals filed by the firm were also dismissed by the I. T. A. T. by a common order dated 15/6/ 1994. There is no dispute that the order passed by the I. T. A. T. on 15/6/1994 has attained finality.

(3.) As the firm failed to discharge the tax liability finalised for the assessment years A. Y. 86-87 and 87-88, the tax recovery officer treated the petitioner who was a partner of the firm as defaulter and attached the residential flat of the petitioner bearing Flat No. 301-1, New Guru Kripa Apartment, village Amboli, Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W) , Mumbai for recovery of the demand confirmed against the firm.