<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1970 (2) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7865</link>
    <description>In certificate recovery proceedings, the Tax Recovery Officer is bound by the assessment and certificate and cannot re-examine the correctness of the assessment or whether the Hindu undivided family was the proper assessee; such objections must be pursued in appropriate proceedings under the Act. Service of the demand notice on the family was upheld on the factual finding that it was received by an employee, and that finding was not interfered with in supervisory jurisdiction. Recovery could also proceed directly against the assessee named in the certificate, making the objection that only receivers could be proceeded against untenable. The recovery order was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (2) TMI 18 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7865</link>
      <description>In certificate recovery proceedings, the Tax Recovery Officer is bound by the assessment and certificate and cannot re-examine the correctness of the assessment or whether the Hindu undivided family was the proper assessee; such objections must be pursued in appropriate proceedings under the Act. Service of the demand notice on the family was upheld on the factual finding that it was received by an employee, and that finding was not interfered with in supervisory jurisdiction. Recovery could also proceed directly against the assessee named in the certificate, making the objection that only receivers could be proceeded against untenable. The recovery order was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>