2022 (10) TMI 238

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent') to lift the attachment order dated 27th December, 2019, issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ('the Act') with respect to the fixed deposits held by the Petitioner herein with the Respondent no.1, the Nainital Bank Ltd. ('Bank'). 2. The learned Counsel states that the Petitioner herein used her personal savings for opening fixed deposits with the Bank. He states that the petitioner is an 88 years old senior citizen and suffers from various old age related ailments and due to her advanced age, she was advised by the banker to make her son Sh. Ravi Chopra as a second holder in these fixed deposits, on an either or survivor mode, so that the fixed deposits can be liquidated by the petitioner in case of an medical em....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itioner from the Fixed Deposit Receipts ('FDRs'). 2.2. Learned counsel states that on 22nd January, 2020, when the Petitioner approached the Bank for encashment of the fixed deposits the banker informed her that the Bank cannot permit encashment in view of the attachment order received from the Department. He states that the communication of the Department addressed to the Bank was initially not provided to the Petitioner. He states that the Petitioner was subsequently provided with the notice dated 27th December, 2019, issued by the Assessing Officer ('AO') of the Petitioner's son Sh. Ravi Chopra. 2.3. Learned counsel states that the notice is with respect to the PAN of Sh. Ravi Chopra, and the Petitioner herein has no concern with t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... contentions of the Petitioner as regards filing of income tax returns and the assessment order, wherein it is stated that the interest income earned from the FDR has been disclosed as her personal income and offered to tax. He has also not disputed her contention that the amounts standing in the FDRs exclusively belonging to the Petitioner to the exclusion of Sh. Ravi Chopra. 6.2. It is also a matter of record that the Petitioner is an 88 year old senior citizen and her explanation that her son was joined as a second holder in the FDRs as an abundant caution to facilitate encashment in case of any unforeseen event appears plausible. 6.3. We also note that the notice dated 27th December, 2019, issued by the AO of Sh. Ravi Chopra and a....