2022 (5) TMI 373 - HC - Income Tax

High Court seeks land ownership clarity in writ petition, directs swift verification

PRAVIN TALAKSHIBHAI KOTAK Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE

The High Court directed notice to the respondents and emphasized the need for clarification on the title and ownership of the land in a writ application ... Attachment of the land -Tax recovery proceedings - title and the ownership of the Non- Agricultural parcel of land situated at Bodakdev, bearing Survey No.177/2 admeasuring 4047 Sq. Mtrs. - HELD THAT:- Today, for the first time it has come to the notice of this Court that infact, Vikas Arvindbhai Shah passed away long time back. Therefore, the only exercise which the Principal Commissioner needs to now undertake is to look into the documents produced by the writ applicants and ascertain as regards the title and possession over the property-in-question. Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Principal Commissioner at the earliest and the same shall be completed within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this order. The Principal Commissioner shall look into all documents which are on record and take an appropriate call as regards the attachment of the property-in-question. With the aforesaid, this writ application is disposed of. We leave it open for the writ applicant to come back to this Court in case of any further difficulty. Issues:1. Writ application under Article 226 seeking relief from attachment of land.2. Quashing of consequential action by the Respondent.3. Stay on execution of attachment and mutation entry.4. Ownership dispute over the land in question.5. Assurance by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to investigate the matter.6. Verification of documents to establish lawful ownership.7. Disposal of the writ application with provision for further recourse if needed.Analysis:The writ applicants sought relief through a writ of mandamus to quash the attachment of a specific land parcel, challenging the claim that it belonged to another individual. They also requested to set aside consequential actions by the Respondent and sought a stay on execution pending final disposal. The High Court, in its order, directed notice to the respondents and emphasized the need for clarification on the title and ownership of the land. The Court highlighted the need to understand the basis of the Income Tax Department's claim regarding ownership and instructed the Tax Recovery Officer to address the representations filed by the writ applicants.Upon the intervention of the learned Senior Counsel for the Revenue, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax assured a prompt investigation into the matter. The Court was informed that the lawful owners had submitted relevant documents supporting their claim and that the individual allegedly owning the land had passed away. Consequently, the Principal Commissioner was tasked with examining the documents to determine the rightful ownership and possession of the property. The Court directed the Principal Commissioner to complete the verification process within two weeks, emphasizing a thorough review of all relevant records before making a decision on the attachment.Ultimately, the writ application was disposed of with the provision for the applicants to return in case of further difficulties. The learned Senior Counsel clarified the roles of the Principal Commissioner and the Tax Recovery Officer in the investigative process, ensuring necessary actions were undertaken. Direct service was permitted, and a copy of the order was provided to the Senior Counsel for communication purposes, concluding the legal proceedings on the matter.