https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338695 An attachment under Rule 48 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 is confined to the specific recovery demand for which it is issued, including interest under section 220(2), and cannot continue after that demand is fully discharged. A later penalty order arising after the attachment does not enlarge or extend the earlier attachment to cover a new liability. Once the entire amount covered by the recovery certificate was paid before any auction or sale, the declaration treating the jointly owned property sale as null and void could not be sustained and was liable to be quashed. en-us Thu, 02 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 May 2017 17:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338695 An attachment under Rule 48 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 is confined to the specific recovery demand for which it is issued, including interest under section 220(2), and cannot continue after that demand is fully discharged. A later penalty order arising after the attachment does not enlarge or extend the earlier attachment to cover a new liability. Once the entire amount covered by the recovery certificate was paid before any auction or sale, the declaration treating the jointly owned property sale as null and void could not be sustained and was liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 02 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338695