https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21666 The court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the petition as the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. The validity of the attachment was not challenged, and the court emphasized the recoverable amount as the key issue. The court rejected the Department's claim of estoppel, emphasizing the unilateral appropriation without observing natural justice. It was ruled that the Department could only claim what the deceased partner could have claimed from his share. The court directed settlement of accounts considering liabilities, with the net amount due to the deceased partner's share to be appropriated towards income-tax arrears. en-us Tue, 19 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:37:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21666 The court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the petition as the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. The validity of the attachment was not challenged, and the court emphasized the recoverable amount as the key issue. The court rejected the Department's claim of estoppel, emphasizing the unilateral appropriation without observing natural justice. It was ruled that the Department could only claim what the deceased partner could have claimed from his share. The court directed settlement of accounts considering liabilities, with the net amount due to the deceased partner's share to be appropriated towards income-tax arrears. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21666