https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359024 The Tax Recovery Officer lacks jurisdiction in recovery proceedings under the Income-tax Act to declare a post-attachment transfer of immovable property void. Where the Revenue contends that a sale was effected to defeat recovery or defraud the department, the proper course is to seek a declaration in civil proceedings, not to obtain such relief from the Tax Recovery Officer under the Second Schedule. On that basis, the direction permitting the writ petitioner to pursue adjudication under Rule 11 was unsustainable and was set aside. en-us Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 May 2018 15:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359024 The Tax Recovery Officer lacks jurisdiction in recovery proceedings under the Income-tax Act to declare a post-attachment transfer of immovable property void. Where the Revenue contends that a sale was effected to defeat recovery or defraud the department, the proper course is to seek a declaration in civil proceedings, not to obtain such relief from the Tax Recovery Officer under the Second Schedule. On that basis, the direction permitting the writ petitioner to pursue adjudication under Rule 11 was unsustainable and was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359024