TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1487
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t"). Subsequently, the assessment orders were passed on 06.02.2020 for the AYs 2012-2013 to 2017-2018. 3. As far as the AYs 2015-16 to 2017-2018 are concerned, the Assessing Officer made new additions in the assessment orders dated 06.02.2020. On the other hand, the assessment orders, pertaining to AYs 2012-2013 to 2014-2015, were passed with "Nil" addition. Subsequent to the said assessment order, the impugned attachment order came to be passed on 15.07.2022. 4. Aggrieved over the aforesaid assessment order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. After hearing the concerned parties, the CIT(A) had set aside the aforesaid new additions made by the assessing officer and the appeal was partly allowed vide order dated 15.09.2023, which was given effect on 19.10.2023. 5. Thereafter, against the CIT(A) order dated 15.09.2023, the Department had preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), whereby, the said order was confirmed by ITAT vide order dated 30.04.2025. In spite of the confirmation order, the respondents had failed to lift the attachment order till date. 6. He would submit that as far as the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ver, the interest and costs has not been paid by the Assessee. 2012-13 86,491/- The Assessee has paid raised demand of Rs. 1,87,403/- on 09.08.2024. The TRO Central- 2, Chennai passed an order charging Rule 5 interest and costs on 26.08.2024. However, the interest and costs has not been paid by the Assessee. 2013-14 64,212/- The Assessee has paid raised demand of Rs. 1,39,134/- on 09.08.2024. The TRO Central- 2, Chennai passed an order charging Rule 5 interest and costs on 26.08.2024. However, the interest and costs has not been paid by the Assessee. 2014-15 48,473/- The Assessee has paid raised demand of Rs. 1,05,029/- on 09.08.2024. The TRO Central- 2, Chennai passed an order charging Rule 5 interest and costs on 26.08.2024. However, the interest and costs has not been paid by the Assessee. 12. However, he had accepted the legal position as per the law laid down by this Court in the aforementioned two citations referred by the petitioner and hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders. 13. I have given due consideration to the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....than Rupees Twenty Crores, and action of the Revenue Department, in refusing to consider the petitioner's request for raising attachment not tenable. It is submitted that, this Court, in the case of (Sri Lakshmi Brick Industries Vs. The Tax Recovery Officer) reported in (2013) 351 ITC 0345 has considered a similar issue to release the property, which was the subject matter of attachment, and rendered the decision, following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of (Sri Mohan Wahi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and others) reported in (2001) 248 ITR 799. 5. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Income Tax Department has referred to Section 225 (3) of the Act, and submitted that, where a certificate has been drawn up, and subsequently, the amount of the outstanding demand is reduced as a result of an Appeal, or other proceeding, under the Act, the Tax Recovery Officer shall, when the order, which was the subject matter of such Appeal, or other proceeding has become final and conclusive, amend the certificate, or cancel it, as the case may be. Placing emphasis on the words "final'' and ''conclusive'', it is sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clusive'' would mean the finality attached to the order, when the order is challenged and taken to the logical end, or in the case, where the Department accepts the judgment. In other words, the stand taken by the Revenue is that, even if the Revenue fails to succeed in the Tax Case Appeals, yet, they got a remedy of Appeal to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and only thereafter, the proceeding could be construed as final and conclusive. However, I am not in a position of subscribing to such a submission, as Section 225 (3) should not be read in isolation, but should be read along with Section 222. This is so because, in terms of Section 222, where, an assessee is in default, or is deemed to be in default in making payment of tax, the Tax Recovery Officer may issue a certificate, specifying the amount of arrears due from the assessee, and shall proceed to recover from such assessee, the amount so specified, by one or more of the modes, which includes attachment and sale of the assessee's immovable properties. The second schedule sets out the procedure for recovery of tax. Therefore, the action, that is required to be taken prior to the property being attached is that, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en reduced to nil, the Tax Recovery Officer has no power to confirm the sale. If that be the case, then, it would apply with more force in a case of attachment, which is a step anterior to sale. 13. The decision rendered in Sri Mohan Wahi's case (supra) was taken into consideration by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in Sri Lakshmi Brick Industries case (supra) wherein, it was held as follows:- "12. In the present case, the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which is the highest fact finding authority, held infavour of the petitioner assessee and that order has been given effect to. As a consequence, the Tax Recovery Officer is bound to give effect of the order of the Assistant Commissioner, who accepted the order of the Tribunal. It is another matter for the Department to proceed in Appeal, and the Department is always at liberty to proceed for recovery, if they succeed in the Appeal before the Court. The provisions of Section 225(2) of the Income Tax Act,1961, gives a mandate to Tax Recovery Officer to pass appropriate orders based on the orders passed in Appeal, or other proceedings. 13. In such view of the matter, the first respond....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resent case, the Appeal filed by the petitioner/assessee has been allowed in full by ITAT, and demand of tax, in respect of the assessment year 2009-10 was Nil, and with regard to two assessment years, it has resulted in refund. Thus, to say that the order of attachment should still continue till the matter reaches the Hon'ble Supreme Court would be an interpretation, which would be inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, more particularly, by reading together Sections 222 and 225 of the Act. 18. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the object of the demand is to secure the interest of the revenue. The Income Tax Officer acquires jurisdiction to attach the property based on a certificate issued by the Tax Recovery Officer, certifying that the assessee is a defaulter. As on date, the Tax Recovery Officer has not issued such a certificate. Even assuming that the Tax Case Appeal filed by the Revenue is entertained, that by itself, will not make the petitioner as an assessee in default, on account of the fact that the entire tax liability is wiped of pursuant to the order of ITAT. 19. Assuming further that the Revenue succeeds in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed." 18. A reading of the above would show that once if the order attained its finality on the factual aspect at the level of ITAT and if the amount was paid as per the order passed by the Tribunal, no further recovery can be initiated and thus, the concerned Authority is bound to lift the attachment order. 19. In a similar way, this Court had already dealt with the very same issue in W.P.Nos.22913 to 22915 & 24101 of 2012 and passed the order dated 01.02.2013 (referred supra). The relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: "12. In the present case, the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which is the highest fact finding authority, held in favour of the petitioner assessee and that order has been given effect to. As a consequence, the Tax Recovery Officer is bound to give effect of the order of the Assistant Commissioner who accepted the order of the Tribunal. It is another matter for the department to proceed in appeal and the department is always at liberty to proceed for recovery if they succeed in the appeal before the court. The provisions of Section ....