SARATHI MAJUMDAR Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the assessing officer while raising a demand for additional tax on the petitioning assessee has passed an order of provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts. The petitioner says that such order of attachment prevents the petitioner from paying off the amount demanded since he cannot operate his accounts.

(2.) By a notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the concerned income tax officer has required the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.22,05,020/- on the basis of an order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act. The amount was required to be paid to the authorised bank within 30 days of the service of the notice. The concerned official has reminded the petitioner that the failure of the petitioner to pay the amount within the time specified would render the petitioner liable to pay simple interest at one and one-half per cent for every month or part thereof after the expiry of the 30-day period.

(3.) The petitioner says that simultaneously with issuing the notice of demand to the petitioner on March 30, 2015, the income tax officer wrote to the petitioner's bank directing it not to pay any amount to the petitioner or to any person out of the accounts maintained by the petitioner in such bank. The notice to the bank dated March 30, 2015 refers to Section 281B of the Act. The petitioner claims to have been made aware of the order of attachment by the concerned bank.