https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292905 Initiation of recovery under section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as commencing recovery proceedings for limitation purposes, and the court-ordered stay extended the limitation period under section 46(7). Notices issued under section 46(5A) were therefore not time-barred and remained valid as recovery steps, even though earlier proceedings had not produced actual recovery. However, where one mode of recovery was already pending, resort to an additional mode under section 46(5A) required special reasons to be recorded; as none were recorded, that recovery action was vitiated and the writ petitions succeeded on that narrow ground. en-us Tue, 09 Aug 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jan 2021 15:32:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292905 Initiation of recovery under section 46(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as commencing recovery proceedings for limitation purposes, and the court-ordered stay extended the limitation period under section 46(7). Notices issued under section 46(5A) were therefore not time-barred and remained valid as recovery steps, even though earlier proceedings had not produced actual recovery. However, where one mode of recovery was already pending, resort to an additional mode under section 46(5A) required special reasons to be recorded; as none were recorded, that recovery action was vitiated and the writ petitions succeeded on that narrow ground. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Aug 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292905