The properties were settled for the benefit of grand children . The petitioner was one of the trustees, in the year 1986 joined the assessee-company as a managing director and resigned from the company in the year 1993. In 1990 the Department carried out a survey action in the case of the company. Orders of assessment were passed for the assessment years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91. The liability of the managing director was quantified. For realisation of the liability, by separate attachment orders, the Tax Recovery Officer attached three properties belonging to the trust on the premise that the three properties belonged to the petitioner in his individual capacity. On a writ the Court held that the properties belonged to the trust which was settled by will by S before initiation of recovery proceedings by the Revenue against the petitioner. The properties did not belong to the petitioner in his individual capacity or his legal heirs or representatives. The trust had been formed in the year 1978 and the will of the mother was made in 1985 much before initiation of recovery proceedings. There was no question of the properties being diverted to the trust to evade payment of due tax. That being the position, the attachment orders were liable to be quashed.( AY.1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91)
Rajesh T. Shah v. Tax Recovery Officer (2020)425 ITR 443/191 DTR 66/ 315 CTR 490/ 272 Taxman 457 (Bom) (HC)
S. 179 : Private company – Liability of directors -Recovery of tax — Attachment and sale of property — Properties settled on trust for grandchildren – Recovery proceedings Against son -Properties settled on Trust cannot be attached .