https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9435 A party that secured closure of an interim injunction by stating it was no longer interested in the property, while simultaneously pursuing possession through tax recovery steps, was found to have acted without bona fides and to have misled the court. The principle of restitution required restoration of the position existing before the disputed dispossession, so the interim injunction was restored and possession of the theatre premises was directed to be returned pending further orders. The competing question whether rule 39 or rule 40 of the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 applied was left open for decision in the main proceedings. en-us Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9435 A party that secured closure of an interim injunction by stating it was no longer interested in the property, while simultaneously pursuing possession through tax recovery steps, was found to have acted without bona fides and to have misled the court. The principle of restitution required restoration of the position existing before the disputed dispossession, so the interim injunction was restored and possession of the theatre premises was directed to be returned pending further orders. The competing question whether rule 39 or rule 40 of the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 applied was left open for decision in the main proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9435