Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the notification issued under section 165 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, could be quashed for auctioning the petitioner's properties towards sales tax dues without affording him an opportunity of hearing.
Analysis: The petition challenged the attachment and proposed auction of immovable properties standing in the petitioner's name for recovery of sales tax dues of another entity. The decisive circumstance was that the properties were sought to be proceeded against without prior notice or hearing to the petitioner, who claimed ownership over them. The absence of an opportunity to be heard amounted to a breach of the principles of natural justice, and the Court declined to examine the merits of whether the properties could ultimately be proceeded against for the dues in question.
Conclusion: The notification was quashed and set aside for breach of natural justice, with liberty to the department to proceed afresh in accordance with law after giving the petitioner full opportunity of hearing.
Final Conclusion: The impugned recovery action could not stand because it was taken without observing fair hearing requirements, though the department was left free to initiate fresh proceedings lawfully.
Ratio Decidendi: Where immovable property is proposed to be attached or auctioned for recovery, the affected person must be given a prior opportunity of hearing; failure to do so renders the action invalid for breach of natural justice.