Apot/296/2023 Ia No: Ga/1/2023 Keventer Agro Limited v. Assistant/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4(1), Kolkata And Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONORIGINAL SIDE APOT/296/2023IA NO: GA/1/2023KEVENTER AGRO LIMITEDVSASSISTANT/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1),KOLKATA AND ORS BEFORE :THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 6 September, 2023 Appearance :Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Akhilesh Gupta, Adv.Mr. Pranav Sharma, Adv.Mr. Swetank Rai, Adv.…for appellantMs. Smita Das De, Adv.…for respondent The Court : - This intra-Court appeal by the writ petitioner is directed againstthe order dated 22[nd] August, 2023 in WPO No. 1511 of 2023. In the said writ petitionthe appellant/assessee challenged an order passed by the assessing officer underSection 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 directing the appellant to pay 50% of thedemand pursuant to the assessment proceeding completed on 29[th] May, 2023. It is notin dispute that as against the assessment order the assessee has preferred an appealbefore the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals (CITA) on 26[th] June, 2023 and theappeal is pending. After elaborately hearing the learned Senior Advocate for theappellant and Counsel for respondent/department we are of the view that to decide theissue as to whether the appellant has to deposit 20% of the demand raised of theentitled sum to grant a stay and or whether the appellant is entitled for anunconditional stay would be a matter of academic interest in the instant case as theappellant has canvassed several points in the stay petition dated 31.07.29023 touchingupon the merits of the assessment as well as relying upon various case laws and also pointing out that the assessment being a high pitched assessment heavy conditionimposed by the assessing officer to pay the 20% of the demand is onerous. Consideringthe material facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that assessment is ahigh pitched assessment we are of the view that the appeal itself can be disposed of bythe Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals at an early date preferably within the periodof two months from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the order passed by the assessingofficer dated 10[th] August, 2023 under Section 220(6) of the Act shall be kept inabeyance and there would be a direction to the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal filed bythe appellant challenging the assessment order on 26.06.2023 after affording anopportunity to the appellant as soon as possible preferably within a period of twomonths from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order. The appellant isdirected to extend full cooperation to the Appellate Authority in expeditious disposal ofthe appeal without seeking for unnecessary adjournment. Till then, the order passed bythe assessing officer under Section 220(6) of the Act dated 26.06.2023 shall be kept inabeyance. In order to ensure that this direction is complied with within the time linesuggested by this Court, the matter may be assigned to Commissioner of Income Tax,Appeals having jurisdiction over the assessee instead of Commissioner of Income Tax,Appeals, Faceless Assessment Circle. We make it clear, that this order is passed considering the peculiar facts andcircumstances of the case and not to be treated as a precedent. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)