Held, dismissing the writ petition, that the auction notice clearly stated that the terms and conditions of the proposed auction could be downloaded from the website of the Income-tax Department or collected from the office of the Tax Recovery Officer. There was no violation of rule 53(b).   There was no irregularity committed by the Income-tax Department while auctioning the property. The Income-tax Department also made it very clear that the auction amount would be adjusted toward the tax liability and the interest thereon and the balance if any would be adjusted and payable towards the other stakeholders, namely, 234 time share holders, dues to the bank and the tax due to the Commercial Tax Department totalling to Rs. 95,02,968. Since the amount that was recovered from the auction sale was only Rs.3,38,03,500, the third respondent was also bound to pay the amounts due to the 234 time share holders, the Commercial Tax Department and the bank. These were the liabilities of the assessee which the third respondent had undertaken to discharge and therefore, there was no irregularity in the auction conducted by the Income-tax Department.