TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 350
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the orders of Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short, 'the DRT') and Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the DRAT') refusing to set aside the sale of the mortgaged properties have been set aside and the matter remanded to the DRT for fresh consideration in terms of the directions contained in the order dated 11.08.2014. 3. The facts which will require a notice are as follows :- 4. O.As Nos. 994 of 2001 and 995 of 2001 were instituted by the appellant-ICICI Bank Limited before the DRT, Chennai claiming a sum of Rs. 57,22,710/- and Rs. 29,31,235.77/- respectively with interest against two separate financial accommodation provided to the respondents-borrowers. 5. Sometime in the year 2003, the respondents-borrowers c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issed the application of the respondents-borrowers. The said order of the DRT was also upheld by the learned DRAT by order dated 03.01.2005. The following findings of the DRAT being relevant would require a specific notice. "Thus, the defendants failed to bring any prospective buyer. They also failed to produce any documentary proof with respect to their claim about the price of the property. They also declined to accept the offer made by the bank's counsel. Even while this appeal was being argued, the same offer was repeated by the bank's counsel, but there was no response from the appellant's side. It is therefore, evident that the appellants just want to put hindrance in the sale proceedings, thus depriving the applicant ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ticularly, the grounds which have prevailed upon the High Court to interfere with the orders passed by the DRT and the DRAT. A consideration of the materials on record would go to show that the offset price was fixed on the basis of a report of the Valuation Officer and in the fixation of the said price the respondents were associated being party to the proceedings before the DRT. That apart the said grievance of the respondents-borrowers must be considered in the light of the fact that the respondents-borrowers had persistently failed either to liquidate the dues or to bring a willing purchaser who could offer a reasonable price for the mortgaged properties. 11. Insofar as the Second Schedule of Income Tax Rules, 1961 are concerned, nothi....