High Court directs release of bank account attachment under Income-tax Act, 1961, limiting to tax demand only.

The High Court allowed the writ petition challenging the provisional attachment of bank accounts under section 281B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court directed the respondents to release the attachment, except to the extent of the tax demand raised against the petitioner, emphasizing that post-assessment, the Revenue should only attach the amount equivalent to the demand raised, not the entire credit amount in the bank accounts. The court deemed the Revenue's extension of the attachment period over Rs. 33 lakhs in all bank accounts post-assessment as unjustified and illegal.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to provisional attachment of bank accounts under section 281B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court addressed the challenge in a writ petition against the provisional attachment of bank accounts under section 281B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The orders dated December 12, 2011, attaching the petitioner's bank accounts were contested. The amounts of Rs. 12,13,023, Rs. 16,87,031, and Rs. 5,35,481 were attached on different dates. A subsequent corrigendum corrected the period of attachment up to June 11, 2012, and was further extended in subsequent orders. The petitioner's counsel highlighted that a regular assessment had been framed, and a total tax demand of Rs. 9,62,378 was raised against the petitioner post the filing of the writ petition.

The court acknowledged the petitioner's argument that provisional attachment should only occur before assessment and that post-assessment, the Revenue should only attach the amount equivalent to the demand raised, not the entire credit amount in the bank accounts. The purpose of provisional attachment is to secure the Revenue's interest pending assessment proceedings. Once assessment is completed, the Revenue is justified in attaching the account only to the extent of the demand raised against the assessee. The court found the Revenue's action of extending the attachment period over Rs. 33 lakhs in all bank accounts of the petitioner post-assessment as unjustified and illegal.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to release the provisional attachment, except to the extent of the tax demand raised against the petitioner. The tax demand was not to be realized until the appeal filed by the assessee was decided by the competent authority.

---