Allowing the petition the Court held that 15 per cent. of the demand amount had already been recovered by the Department and such amount was covered by the office memorandum dated February 29, 2016 issued by the Board . The authorities were not justified to pass the attachment notices under section 226(3) . The claim of the assessee, seeking refund of the amounts attached pursuant to such directions, was not justified and could not be granted. The notices issued to the banks under section 226(3) in respect of the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were quashed and set aside. ( AY.2011-12, 2012-13)
Sesa Resources Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 408 ITR 527 (Bom) (HC)
S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Stay of recovery -Garnishee proceedings -When an application for stay was pending before the Commissioner, attachment of bank accounts as per office Memorandum of Central Board of Direct Taxes, 15 Per Cent. of demand recovered from Assessee — Notices was quashed and set aside- However the claim of the assessee, seeking refund of the amounts attached pursuant to such directions, was not justified and could not be granted. [ S.226(3) ]