TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 797
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve fled this Petition on behalf of the trust for the above reliefs. The trust was settled by one Smt. Sushila R. Laliwala, wife of Ramniklal C. Laliwala under a deed of trust dated 14th April 1978 for the Benefit of her grand children. Originally, as per the trust deed the following four trustees were appointed viz.; (i) Sushila R. Laliwala (ii) Harish R. Laliwala (iii) Suresh Kantilal rhokshi (iv) Jyotsna Praful Laliwala 2.1. Thereafter, the constitution of the trustees was changed and at the time of fling of the Petition the trustees were : (i) Harish R. Laliwala (ii) Suresh Kantilal rhokshi (iii) Rajesh T. Shah (iv) Devila H. Laliwala 3. During the pendency of this petition Harish R. Laliwala and Suresh Kantilal Chokshi passed away and their names were deleted. The third trustee viz; Amita Apurva Laliwala who was added as trustee was impleaded as petitioner No.3 in the Petition. 4. This Court after hearing the matter for some time on 27th October 2014 passed the following order :- "This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges:- (i) order dated 15th Decem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Petitioner does not rest his case merely on the grant of probate but seeks to make legal submission which would entail quashing of the attachment proceedings and garnishee notices. 7. Accordingly, stand over to 1st December, 2014." 5. At the outset, Mr. Jagtiani learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that, at the time of passing of the above order dated 27th October 2014, the Will of late Smt. Sushila R. Laliwala was not probated as there was an outstanding caveat pending in the Court Registry. However, subsequently on 31st January 2017 this Court was pleased to issue Letters of Administration with the Will annexed to the property and credits of the deceased Smt. Shushila R. Laliwala. He submitted that a true copy of the Letters of Administration with the Will annexed thereto has been placed on record by affidavit dated 13th February 2017. He submitted that the subject properties described in paragraph No.3.15 of the petition in respect of which separate attachment orders dated 27th August 1997 had been issued on the premise that the said properties belonged to petitioner No.1 in his individual capacity, has now been put to rest by v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions Pvt. Ltd. (assessee company) as Managing Director and resigned from the company in the year 1993. (v) In 1990 the Income Tax Department carried out a survey action in the case of the above assessee company, recorded the statement of the original petitioner No.1 Harish R. Laliwala on 31st March 1990 and passed order dated 10th August 1992 for the assessment year 1988 - 1989 determining an income of Rs. 1,06,30,449/-. In appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the income was re-determined only after carrying forward and setting of loss of income. However for the assessment year 1989 - 1990 income was determined at Rs. 3,63,97,719/- and after rectification the income was reduced to Rs. 18,86,848/-. For the assessment year 1990 y 1991 income was determined at Rs. 1,84,01,500/- which was ultimately reduced to Rs. 1,51,51,500/- by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Thus, for the aforesaid three years the total liability of the original petitioner No.1 being the Managing Director of the assessee company was quantified at Rs. 1,78,00,750/- by the Revenue. (vi) Respondent No.1 thereafter by order dated 15th December 1993 issued under Section 179....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Testamentary Petition No.721 of 1998 to the trustees of the trust. From a conjoint reading of the aforesaid documents, we are of the view that the the subject properties namely (a) Building 'Sushilaben', Road No.4, Khar (West).,(b) Flat at 'Girichhaya', 5th Floor, Band Stand, Chowpati, Mumbai - 400 - 006 and (c) Shop at Kothari Mansion, Ground Floor, Opp. Girgaon Court, Parekh Street, Mumbai - 400 - 004 do not belong to the original petitioner No.1 Harish R. Laliwala in his individual capacity. If that be the position then the impugned attachment orders in respect of the subject properties issued by respondent No.1 for realisation of the liability of the original petitioner No.1 either in his individual capacity or as Managing Director of M/s. Verma Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. (asseesee company) would be untenable in law and fact. 10. Mr. Suresh Kumar appearing on behalf of the Revenue also fairly submits that pursuant to issuance of the Letters of Administration by this Court to the trustees of the trust, the above position is settled in law that the subject properties stand in the name of the trust and do not belong to the original petitioner No.1 against whom the Revenue has initiat....