https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18265 The court held that the notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act was without jurisdiction and against statutory provisions as no prior notice was sent to the petitioner. It emphasized the necessity of issuing a notice before initiating garnishee proceedings and found the petitioner was condemned unheard, violating procedural requirements. The court quashed the notice, accepted the writ petition with costs, and held the Department accountable for procedural lapses, awarding costs of Rs. 5,000 in each petition. en-us Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:26:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18265 The court held that the notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act was without jurisdiction and against statutory provisions as no prior notice was sent to the petitioner. It emphasized the necessity of issuing a notice before initiating garnishee proceedings and found the petitioner was condemned unheard, violating procedural requirements. The court quashed the notice, accepted the writ petition with costs, and held the Department accountable for procedural lapses, awarding costs of Rs. 5,000 in each petition. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18265