2010 (1) TMI 1135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the property comprised in Survey No. 54/3 at Vallam Village, Chengalpet District. By an order of assessment passed by the first respondent dated December 31, 2003, the assessing officer while rejecting the claims of exemption has directed the petitioner to pay the tax of Rs. 21,48,733 along with a penalty of Rs. 32,23,100. It was pursuant to the said order of assessment, the abovesaid order of attachment came to be passed. It is seen that as against the order of assessment passed by the second respondent, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (CT 6) in Appeal No, 98/2008. The said appeal came to be disposed of by an order dated December 2, 2008 by the appellate authority by which the appellate authority set a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he copies of records as directed by the appellate authority and also granted 30 days time to the petitioner to enable him to peruse the records and furnish a detailed reply. After the petitioner furnished the said reply on perusal of the records furnished by the assessing officer, the second respondent would pass orders as per the directions of the appellate authority dated December 2, 2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that once the appellate authority has set aside the order of assessment, the attachment order already passed based on the earlier order of assessment should automatically go. But the respondents are keeping the attachment order alive which is not admissible in law. On the other hand, learned Additional Government....