Case LawHigh Court › M/S Av Traders v. Assistant Commissioner...

M/S Av Traders v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Others

High Court 06 Dec 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · ukhcucis_pg
Parties
M/S Av Traders v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Others
Date of order
06 Dec 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In M/S Av Traders v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Others, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALWrit Petition Misc. Single No. 3338 of 2024 06 December, 2024 M/s Av Traders Versus --Petitioner Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & others --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:-Mr. Rohit Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned counsel for the respondents. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.08.2024/27.08.2024 to the writ petition, whereby the stay application moved by the petitioner under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rejected. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that stay application is not considered by the respondent-department and simpliciter it is stated in the order that the petitioner is not deposited 20% of the total demand of the tax and hence, the stay application was rejected. He further submits that the order itself is bad for the reason that nowhere the Assessing Authority has fixed any percentage to be deposited by the petitioner in the stay application, therefore, the Assessing Officer has not come to this conclusion for considering the stay application as to what amount is to be deposited by the 2024:UHC:9147 petitioner, therefore, the said order cannot sustain. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents-Department, on instructions, submits that if petitioner appears before the Assessing Officer, his stay application will be considered afresh and the reasoned order will be passed thereon. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 22.08.2024/27.08.2024, annexure-1 to the writ petition, is hereby set-aside. Petitioner shall appear before the Assessing Officer to pursue his stay application on or before 11.12.2024 either personally or through its authorized representative and the Assessing Officer shall consider and decide the stay application afresh, in accordance with law. 5. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. AK AVNEET KAUR Digitally signed by AVNEET KAUR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=a82175252dc1a0f53f0e245a1c11df9aa490cfd1403838bf52f9acab4cc3a5b9, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=5BEC18DADE54688668187E4D722C2EDBFDAF35AB2F676A551481BE62508FDDEE, cn=AVNEET KAUR Date: 2024.12.06 17:19:44 +05'30' (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 06.12.2024
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan