"Recovery Officer acts in an arbitrary manner." Analyse the statement in the light of the provisions of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 citing judicial pronouncements, if any.

The Recovery Officer on receipt of the decree from the Presiding Officer is duty bound to make recovery in the manner provided under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. To enable his duties, section 29 of the Act provides that the provisions of the Second and Third Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 shall as far as possible apply with necessary modifications. Provided that any reference under the said provisions and the rules to the 'assesse' shall be construed as a reference to the defendant under the Recovery of Debt and Bankruptcy Act. On a challenge the Apex court in the case of UOI vs. Delhi High Court Bar Association and Others (2002) 4 SCC 275 , observed that "by virtue of section 29 of the Act, the provisions of Second and Third schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962 have become applicable for the realization of dues by the Recovery Officer. Detailed procedure for recovery is contained in these Schedules to the Income-tax Act, including provisions relating to arrest and detention of the defaulter. It cannot, therefore, be said that the Recovery Officer acts in an arbitrary manner. Hence statement given is denied. Furthermore, Section 30, after amendment by the Amendment Act, 2000, gives a right to any person aggrieved by an order of the Recovery Officer, to prefer an appeal to the Tribunal. Thus now an appellate forum has been provided against any order of the Recovery Officer which may not be in accordance with the law. There is, therefore, sufficient safeguard which has been provided in the event of the Recovery Officer acting in an arbitrary or an unreasonable manner.