https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381683 A writ petition challenging attachment of immovable property under the income-tax recovery scheme was held premature because Rule 11 of the Second Schedule provides a specific claim-and-objection procedure. Where the grievance is that the property is not liable to attachment or sale, the Tax Recovery Officer must first investigate the claim under that rule, and the claimant may then pursue a civil suit if necessary. The availability of this statutory remedy meant direct recourse to writ jurisdiction was not maintainable, so the petition was rejected with liberty to invoke Rule 11. en-us Wed, 12 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381683 A writ petition challenging attachment of immovable property under the income-tax recovery scheme was held premature because Rule 11 of the Second Schedule provides a specific claim-and-objection procedure. Where the grievance is that the property is not liable to attachment or sale, the Tax Recovery Officer must first investigate the claim under that rule, and the claimant may then pursue a civil suit if necessary. The availability of this statutory remedy meant direct recourse to writ jurisdiction was not maintainable, so the petition was rejected with liberty to invoke Rule 11. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381683