https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35629 Once notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 is served on the defaulter, and notice under Rule 31 reaches the court holding the attached property, the civil court cannot validly dispose of that property in execution. The Karnataka HC held that service on the Principal Munsiff's Court was effective notice to the First Additional Munsiff because both functioned as the same court, and the vehicle was in court custody, so the auction sale by the civil court was without authority. The sale proceeds had to be applied in priority to the tax recovery authorities, not to the decree-holder. en-us Fri, 16 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:35:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35629 Once notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 is served on the defaulter, and notice under Rule 31 reaches the court holding the attached property, the civil court cannot validly dispose of that property in execution. The Karnataka HC held that service on the Principal Munsiff's Court was effective notice to the First Additional Munsiff because both functioned as the same court, and the vehicle was in court custody, so the auction sale by the civil court was without authority. The sale proceeds had to be applied in priority to the tax recovery authorities, not to the decree-holder. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35629