The High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed that the attachment would be limited to the amounts which were lying to the credit of the petitioner in Cash Credit Account, at the time of freezing and any further credit which may come would not be under attachment.
The petitioner, M/s RCI Industries & Technologies Limited filed the petition and prayed before the court that the Respondent authorities may supply certified copies of documents seized by Income Tax Authority during a search at Head Office as well as a godown. It was also prayed that the Respondent to conclude the process of adjudication within the shortest possible time after issuing show cause notice, setting out proposals for assessment, affording the opportunity to Petitioner to respond to Respondent and pass a reasonable or speaking order.
The Revenue contended that as regards the protection from arrest, firstly the person for whom the protection is sought is not before this Court.
The court rejected the contention of the revenue and said, “without insisting on this legal objection which otherwise goes to the root of the matter, the fact is that by summons the petitioner had been informed that the personal appearance of its Managing Director is not required.”
The division bench consisting of Justice Ajay Tewari and Justice Avnish Jinghan held that the attachment would be limited to the amounts which were lying to the credit of the petitioner in Cash Credit Account, at the time of freezing and any further credit which may come would not be under attachment.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
