<?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>1998 (11) TMI 81 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15866</link>
    <description>Immovable property in the possession of a third party under a prima facie claim of right cannot be sold in tax recovery proceedings for another person&#039;s arrears unless the Department establishes that the property belongs to the defaulter and is attachable in law. Here, the property was reserved for a school, the society had open and continuous possession since 1972, and official records supported its occupation, while the Department produced no reliable material showing continued ownership by the defaulter. The High Court held that the Tax Recovery Officer could not validly proceed against the school property, and the recovery action and proposed auction were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:59:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (11) TMI 81 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15866</link>
      <description>Immovable property in the possession of a third party under a prima facie claim of right cannot be sold in tax recovery proceedings for another person&#039;s arrears unless the Department establishes that the property belongs to the defaulter and is attachable in law. Here, the property was reserved for a school, the society had open and continuous possession since 1972, and official records supported its occupation, while the Department produced no reliable material showing continued ownership by the defaulter. The High Court held that the Tax Recovery Officer could not validly proceed against the school property, and the recovery action and proposed auction were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>