Section 230A — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section 230A, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Shriya Bhupal v ACIT
High CourtHelps departmentValidity unconfirmed
The department has declared my purchase void under s.281 and attached the property. Do they not have to go to a civil court first, as the Supreme Court said in Gangadhar Vishwanath Ranade?
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that they do not. It reasoned that once a statute itself declares a transfer void there can be no further judicial declaration to be obtained, that s.281 is unlike s.53 of the Transfer of Property Act because it makes the transfer void and not voidable, and that since the words 'with the intention to defraud the revenue' were deleted in 1975 there is nothing left for the Revenue to prove in a suit. The remedy under Rule 11(6) of the Second Schedule belongs to the transferee, who must go to the civil court, not to the department.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.