1990 (3) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioner has challenged the notice of demand dated December 9, 1983, issued by the Tax Recovery Officer, Bombay, under section 179 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the petitioner became a director of a private limited company known as Kapadia Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. on November 30, 1966. The income-tax assessments of the said company for the assessmen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r issued a notice of demand dated December 9, 1983, to the petitioner treating him as a defaulter in respect of an amount of Rs. 27,67,668 which was stated to be the taxes due from the company. By an order of attachment dated December 28, 1983, the Tax Recovery Officer attached the petitioner's residential flat in a building known as "Mount Unique" on G. Deshmukh Marg, Bombay-26. Thereafter, the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and not otherwise. This contention requires to be rejected in view of this court's judgments in Union of India v. Manik Dattatreya Lotlikar [1988] 172 ITR 11, and Union of India v. Praveen D. Desai [1988] 173 ITR 303. It was pointed out that the question is pending before the Supreme Court. Be that as it may, the judgments of this court still hold the field and, therefore, following those decisio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erved on him. To ascertain as to what was the case of the Department as regards the petitioner's statement that he had ceased to be a director of the said company from February, 1967, Dr. Balasubramaniam read out from the affidavit-in-reply, a copy of which was in his hand, an averment which was found to be that the Income-tax Officer had made enquiries in the office of the Company Law Board and f....