TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ESH V. MENON RESPONDENT: BY ADV. SRI. P.K.R. MENON, SR. COUNSEL, GOI (TAXES) BY ADV. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Petitioner is a private limited company engaged in real estate development. For the assessment year 2008-09, Ext.P1 order was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to lift the attachment. There was no response to Ext.P7 and therefore they made Ext.P8 reiterating the request for lifting the attachment but however offering the property having an extent of 98.664 cents comprised in R.S.Nos.303/5, 303/6, 303/7, 303/8 and 303/9 covered by document No.4044/07 and situated in Thengode, Kakkanad as alternate security. Petitioner also pointed out that according to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petitioner shall not be considered. 5. In this case although the valuation of the property mentioned in Ext.P8 has not been done by any external agency, still going by the statements contained in Ext.P8, the property mentioned therein is worth Rs.2.95 crores. Therefore, there is no reason to continue the attachment covered by Ext.P6 once the petitioner furnishes adequate security to take care ....