Wp/19252/2009 Of Pragada Sai Suda v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
18 Sep 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/19252/2009 Of Pragada Sai Suda v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
18 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/19252/2009 Of Pragada Sai Suda v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Decision: In the circumstances above, the writ petition is disposed of directingthe respondent Nos.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT HYDERABAD
PRSENT:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
FRIDAY, THE 18[th] DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009
W.P.No. 19252 of 2009
Between:-
Pragada Sai Sudha
Petitioner.
And
The Commissioner of Income Tax,Ayakarbhavan, Hyderabad and others.
Respondents.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
FRIDAY, THE 18[th] DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009
W.P.No. 19252 of 2009
Oral order: (Per: The Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)
An order of attachment dated 27-07-2009 passed by the 3[rd]
respondent in respect of property bearing Door No. 49-39-9, GF-I,Saikuteer Apartments, N.G.G.O’s Colony Vishakapatnam is assailed inthis writ petition.
The petitioner asserts to have purchased the property from the 4[th]respondent for a consideration of Rs.20,82,000-00 on 01-12-2008 under aregistered sale deed and that she is not aware of income tax arrears due
by the 4[th] respondent to the Revenue. The petitioner got issued a lawyer’snotice to the 3[rd] respondent on 10-08-2009 asserting these facts andclaiming that there is no right to proceed against the properties purchasedby her from the 4[th] respondent.
The petitioner may lodge objections to the order of attachment, to the3[rd] respondent under Rule 11 (1) of the II-Schedule to the Income Tax Act,1961 and such objections are required to be considered and disposed ofby the 3[rd] respondent.
In the circumstances above, the writ petition is disposed of directingthe respondent Nos. 1 to 3 not to dispose of by way of sale or otherwisethe property attached under the impugned order of attachment dated 27-07-2009 till the objections to be submitted by the petitioner within two (2)weeks from the date of receipt of this order are considered and disposedof in accordance with law and the decision is communicated to thepetitioner. The 3[rd] respondent shall pass orders on such objections of thepetitioner, before proceeding further pursuant to the order of attachment. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage of admission afterhearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standingcounsel for Income Tax. No costs.
JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
Dated: 18-09-2009Pvks/*
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.