ANITA RANI Vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing orders, annexures-P-2 and P-3, directing Amrik Singh and company--respondent No. 2, the tenant of the petitioner to deposit the rent payable by it to the petitioner towards arrears of tax due from the firm Om Parkash Harbans Lal, and for a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to refund the amount illegally collected by him from respondent No. 2.

(2.) One Anil Kumar was the owner in possession of a vacant plot with an area of 147 square yards situated at Mehlan Road, Sangrur. He mortaged the same with possession with all rights attached to it with the petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 10,000 vide registered mortage deed dated September 30, 1986 (annexure P-l). One of the rights conferred in the mortgage deed on the mortgagee-petitioner is that she has the right to make the construction on the plot, and, when the mortage is to be got redeemed, the mortgagee shall remove the material, or if agreed to shall be entitled to get the price of the material from the mortagor. In the year 1991, the petitioner started construction of two shops which were completed in December, 1994. The said shops remained vacant for about 11/4 years or so and thereafter in the year 1996, both the shops were let out to respondent No. 2 at a monthly rent of Rs. 6,500.

(3.) The Tax Recovery Officer, Ludhiana, issued a notice under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), dated June 13, 1996 to Amrik Singh and Co., stating therein that a sum of Rs. 1,10,043 plus interest under Section 220(2) of the Act is due from Krishan Kumar, a partner of Om Parkash Harbans Lal, Sangrur, on account of arrears of income-tax and that respondent No. 2 should pay to the Tax Recovery Officer, Ludhiana, any amount due from it or held by it, for or on account of the said Krishan Kumar. A copy of the said notice is annexure P-2. The jurisdiction over Om Parkash Harbans Lal, Sangrur, changed on August 2, 1996, from the Tax Recovery Officer (Central), Ludhiana, to the Tax Recovery Officer, Leela Bhawan, Patiala. Respondent No. 1 thereafter addressed a communication dated August 7, 1996, asking respondent No. 2 to send a draft of Rs. 5,000 on account of rent to respondent No. 1 for adjusting the same against outstanding income-tax liability against Om Parkash Harbans Lal. A copy of the said letter is annexure P-3. It is averred that respondent No. 2 thereafter in pursuance of the letter, annexure P-3, has been paying the rent of Rs. 6,500 per month with effect from July, 1996 to respondent No. 1.