Court Invalidates Tax Department's Attachment Order, Directs Registration of Sale Certificate

The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the attachment order by the Income Tax Department was invalid as it occurred after the property was sold in a public auction. The Court directed the Sub-Registrar to register the Sale Certificate issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that the petitioner, a bona fide purchaser, had paid the full sale consideration and that the Income Tax Department could not claim priority over a secured creditor.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to communication prohibiting property transfer due to tax dues and refusal to register sale certificate due to attachment.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought to quash a communication from the Income Tax Department prohibiting property transfer and a subsequent refusal by the Sub-Registrar to register a sale certificate due to attachment. The petitioner, a purchaser in a public auction, argued that the property was bought prior to the attachment order and full payment was made.

2. The facts revealed that the property was auctioned following a Debt Recovery Tribunal order, with the petitioner purchasing it for a sum of Rs. 23,25,000. The Debt Recovery Tribunal issued a Certificate of Sale in favor of the petitioner. However, the Income Tax Department later attached the property due to tax dues of Rs. 1,03,32,973 for the Assessment Year 1998-99.

3. The petitioner contended that the attachment was unjustified as the property was already sold in the auction conducted by the Bank, a secured creditor. The petitioner argued that the Income Tax Department cannot have priority over a secured creditor, citing a relevant court decision.

4. The Income Tax Department acknowledged that they cannot claim priority over a secured creditor but defended the attachment due to outstanding tax dues. After hearing both parties, the Court noted that the attachment was made after the property was sold in the auction, and the petitioner was a bona fide purchaser who had paid the full sale consideration.

5. The Court held that the attachment order was invalid as it came after the property was sold in the auction. The Court directed the Sub-Registrar to register the Sale Certificate issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in favor of the petitioner. The Court quashed the impugned communications and ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that the Income Tax Department cannot claim priority over a secured creditor.

---