https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25967 Disputed questions about whether the attached property was ancestral or self-acquired, whether a gift deed defeated the recovery, and whether the proceedings were time-barred required evidence and were not suitable for writ adjudication. The statutory claim mechanism under Rule 11 of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act allowed a person claiming that attached property was not liable to attachment or sale to seek relief before the Tax Recovery Officer, who could investigate the objection. Because an efficacious alternative remedy existed, the writ petition was not maintainable and the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory recovery procedure. en-us Thu, 28 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:24:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25967 Disputed questions about whether the attached property was ancestral or self-acquired, whether a gift deed defeated the recovery, and whether the proceedings were time-barred required evidence and were not suitable for writ adjudication. The statutory claim mechanism under Rule 11 of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act allowed a person claiming that attached property was not liable to attachment or sale to seek relief before the Tax Recovery Officer, who could investigate the objection. Because an efficacious alternative remedy existed, the writ petition was not maintainable and the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory recovery procedure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Feb 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25967