Court orders return of sale deed deposited as security for tax dues, rejecting department's claims.

The Court ruled in favor of the Income-tax Department, ordering the return of the sale deed deposited as security for the appellant's tax dues. Despite the Department's argument that the deed was for the appellant's father's arrears, the Court found insufficient evidence linking the deed to the father's dues. The Court emphasized the lack of direct evidence and rejected the Department's reliance on circumstantial evidence. Additionally, the Court noted recovery certificates issued for the appellant's advance tax arrears and highlighted the appellant's minor status at the time of deposit, indicating the father's involvement. The Department was directed to return the deed within a month.

---

---

Issues:
- Dispute over the return of a sale deed deposited as security in relation to tax dues.

Analysis:
The appellant sought the return of a sale deed deposited as security for amounts due to the Income-tax Department, claiming no subsisting dues. The Department, however, contended that the deed was deposited for the appellant's father's arrears. The single judge ruled in favor of the Department, prompting the appeal. The Court gave the Department an opportunity to substantiate its claim but found no specific evidence linking the deed to the father's dues. The Department argued circumstantial evidence supported its position, citing communication detailing the father's arrears. However, the Court noted the lack of direct evidence linking the deed to the father's dues. The Court rejected the contention that the appellant faced no pressure from the Department, as recovery certificates were issued for his advance tax arrears. The Court also highlighted the appellant's minor status at the time of deposit, indicating the father's involvement. The Court concluded that the Department rightly accepted the deed as security for the appellant's dues, ordering its return within a month.

---