Case Law Details
Niyasha Barman Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court)
There subsists an order dated March 20, 2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court directing the revenue authorities not to initiate any recovery proceedings during the subsistence of the COVID-19 pandemic. In my view, interest of justice would be subserved by directing the banks of the petitioners to allow the petitioners to operate the bank accounts subject to the bankers’ of the petitioner in WP No.5354(W) of 2020 setting apart a sum of Rs.5 lakhs. Such sum of Rs.5 lakhs, the Court is informed, is lying in one of the bank accounts of such petitioner. Such banker will keep a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in a separate interest bearing fixed deposit account with it. Such deposit will abide by the result of the appeal of such petitioner. The bankers of the petitioner of such petition thereafter will permit the petitioner to operate his bank accounts in accordance with law. There will be stay of the order of attachment of the bank accounts subject to compliance of the aforementioned conditions.
So far as the writ petitioner in WP No.5347(W) of 2020 is concerned, since, a sum of Rs.2 lakhs has already been paid by the banker of such petitioner to the revenue authorities, it would be appropriate to permit such petitioner to operate his bank account. The order of attachment issued by the revenue authorities against such bank account of the petitioner in WP No.5347(W) of 2020 is stayed.
It is clarified that this measures are put in place in view of the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic in the country. None of the observations made herein will prejudice any of the parties in the appeal. The appellate authority is at liberty to decide the appeal in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
