https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17338 Absence of a formal notice under rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act did not invalidate the recovery proceedings where the assessee had actual knowledge of the proceedings, participated in them, and had been served with notices stating the arrears and time for payment; the statutory requirements were treated as substantially complied with. The Court also accepted that a transfer made after initiation of recovery steps could be treated as void against the Revenue under section 281 and the Second Schedule. The objection to non-service of rule 2 notice failed, and the attachment and transfer were upheld as valid against the assessee and the transferees. en-us Fri, 15 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:22:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17338 Absence of a formal notice under rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act did not invalidate the recovery proceedings where the assessee had actual knowledge of the proceedings, participated in them, and had been served with notices stating the arrears and time for payment; the statutory requirements were treated as substantially complied with. The Court also accepted that a transfer made after initiation of recovery steps could be treated as void against the Revenue under section 281 and the Second Schedule. The objection to non-service of rule 2 notice failed, and the attachment and transfer were upheld as valid against the assessee and the transferees. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17338