Saumya Chaurasia Vs A/DCIT & Ors. (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court, in the case of Saumya Chaurasia vs. Assistant/DCIT & Ors., addressed two primary grievances of the petitioner concerning income tax recovery proceedings: the attachment of a bank account containing subsistence allowance and the delayed adjudication of an appeal against an initial tax stay order. The court’s directions provided immediate relief regarding the bank operation and set a deadline for the tax appeal.
Background and Issues
The petitioner, facing recovery proceedings for outstanding income tax dues, had her bank accounts attached by the Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This provision empowers the Assessing Officer (AO) or TRO to require a third party (like a bank) to pay the tax amount due from the assessee. The petitioner challenged this attachment, particularly because one of the affected accounts was a salary account receiving a subsistence allowance. Additionally, the petitioner had filed an appeal/revision before the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) against a previous order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) that required her to pay 20% of the outstanding tax demand to obtain a stay on recovery proceedings. The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of this appeal.
