Pre-assessment restraint on third-party payment lacked jurisdiction; notice was quashed, while assessment and recovery could proceed lawfully.

The Court held that, where no provisional or final assessment had yet been made, the assessing authority had no jurisdiction to issue a notice to a third party directing it to withhold payment to the assessee. The challenge to the constitutional validity of the statutory clauses was treated as already concluded by an earlier decision, so the principal issue was confined to the pre-assessment notice. The notice and restraint on payment were quashed, while the authority was left free to proceed with provisional assessment, final assessment, or recovery in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority could, before any provisional assessment or final assessment was made, issue a notice to a third party restraining payment to the assessee.

Analysis: The challenge to the constitutional validity of the statutory clauses was treated as concluded by an earlier decision of the Court. On the separate question of the notice to the third party, the Court held that no assessment had yet been made and that, in the absence of provisional assessment, the assessing authority had no jurisdiction to require the third party to withhold payment to the assessee. The Court also clarified that this did not prevent the authority from proceeding with provisional assessment, final assessment, or recovery in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The notice and direction restraining payment were quashed, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

---