B.P. JEEVAN REDDY J.
Civil Appeal No. 2109 of 1978 Heard counsel for the parties. Even if it is assumed for the sake of argument that a charge was created by the award made by the arbitrator, it cannot be said to be effective in law. The charge becomes effective only when the award is made a rule of the court and that was done in this case on November 24, 1970, whereas the attachment by the Tax Recovery Officer under the provisions of Schedule II to the Income-tax Act was earlier, i.e., on November 4, 1970. In this view of the matter, the High Court was right in taking the view it did
Appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Delhi Auto And General Finance Private Limited v. Tax Recovery Officer & Others
Delhi Auto And General Finance Private Limited v. Tax Recovery Officer & Others
(Supreme Court Of India)
CA No. 2109 of 1979 and 1083 of 1980 | 13-03-1996
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE JUSTICE B.P. JEEVAN REDDY
- HON'BLE JUSTICE S. SAGHIR AHMAD
Eq Citations
- (1999) 155 CTR SC 265
- (1998) 8 SCC 705
- [1999] 236 ITR 325 (SC)
- [1999] 114 STC 273 (SC)
- LQ/SC/1996/581
Head Note
Constitution of India — Art. 136 — Arbitration — Arbitral award — Charge on property — Priority of attachment — Attachment by Tax Recovery Officer under S. 281 of Income Tax Act, 1961 earlier than attachment by arbitrator — Held, charge becomes effective only when award is made a rule of court — Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Or. 20 Rr. 12 & 13 — Income Tax Act, 1961, S. 281
