Limitation under Rule 68B can invalidate an auction notice, but tax recovery may continue through fresh attachment and other measures.

Rule 68B of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act bars an auction notice for sale of attached immovable property if issued beyond the prescribed time limit, so such a notice cannot be sustained. However, lapse of that period does not extinguish the underlying tax demand. The Department may still use other recovery mechanisms under the Second Schedule, including attachment, sale, arrest and detention, or appointment of a receiver, and may initiate fresh recovery proceedings, including a fresh attachment of the property, if otherwise permissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the auction notice for sale of the attached immovable property was barred by limitation under Rule 68B of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the Department could still proceed by adopting other recovery measures, including fresh attachment.

Analysis: Rule 68B prescribed a time limit for sale of attached immovable property, and the notice issued beyond that period could not be sustained. At the same time, the tax demand itself was not wiped out by lapse of time. Rule 4 of the Second Schedule provided alternative recovery mechanisms, including attachment, sale, arrest and detention, or appointment of a receiver. The Department was therefore not precluded from initiating fresh proceedings for recovery of the tax and interest, including a fresh attachment of the subject property under the other provisions of the Second Schedule.

Conclusion: The challenge to the impugned auction notice succeeded on the ground of limitation, but the Department was left free to pursue recovery through other permissible proceedings, including a fresh attachment.

---