Wp/105323/2017 Of M/S Rajiv Travels v. Income Tax Officer Ward-2

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THER DAY OF JULY 2017 BEFORE THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICK K.N. PHANBENDRA #WRIT PETITION NO.109323/2017 (TIT) BETWREN% M/S RAJIV TRAVELS,PRESENT ADDRESS:GS R COMPLEX, K.C.ROAD,]BELLARY 583101 (PAN: AAGFRO444M),CELL: ,EMAIL: BY ITS PARTNER,SMT.H.ASHRITHA W/O RAVIPRAKASH. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MANOJ D.PUKALE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,‘AAYAKAR BHAVAN’ STAFF ROAD,FORT, BELLARY 583102,TEL: 08392-268282. 2.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)“AAYAKAR BHAVAN’ STAFF ROAD,KALABURGI 585105,TRHL: 008172 256435“AAYAKAR BHAVAN’ STAFF ROAD,KALABURGI 585105,TRHL: 008172 256435 3.PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,‘AAYAKAR BHAVAN’ SEDAM ROAD,‘AAYAKAR BHAVAN’ SEDAM ROAD, KALABURGI 585105,TEL: 08172-260370. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PRTITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES296 & 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THEBXBRCISK OF RBSPONDENT NO.1 OF RBCOVERYMODE UNDER SECTION 226(3) OF THE IT ACT VIDEANNEBEXURE-K DATED O3.04.2017 AND PRAYED FQUASHING THE EXERCISE OF RESPONDENT NO.1 OFDEMAND RECOVERY VIDE CALL MEMO IN ANNEXURE-N DATED 12.06.2017, NO. ARREARS/ BVVPS4722G/TIT—2/2016-17 AND SOUGHT FOR DIRECTION DIRECTINGTHR RESPONDENT NO.1] TO VACATEKE THE RECOVMODE UNDER SECTION 226(3) OF IT ACT, VIDEANNEXU RE-KDATED.03.04.32017ANILWRIT|ORMANDAMUS DIRECTING THR RESPONDENT NO.1 TOVACATER THR DEMAND RECOVERY VIDE CALL MEMO IANNEXU RE -DATEHD12.06.2017,NO.ARREARS BVVPS4722G/ITO W-2/2016-17 AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERSTHIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Office is hereby directed to show the name ofsri Y.V.Raviraj as counsel appearing for respondentsNo.1 to 3, oDHeard both counsels, 3.The petitioner has approached this courtfor various reliefs particularly a writ of mandamusseeking a direction to respondent No.1 to vacate therecovery mode under section 226(3) of the IncomeTax Act, vide Annexure-K and also vacate thedemand recovery vide call memo as per Annexure-Ndated 12.06.2017 and also directing the respondentsNo.1 to 3 to grant stay as prayed for by the petitionervide Annexure-C dated 23.01.2017. 4Annexure-C discloses that the petitionerhas made representation seeking stay of the demandunder section 220(6) on the ground that, thepetitioner has preferred an appeal against theassessment order for the assessment year 2014-15 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),Kalaburagi. 5.The learned counsel brought to the noticeof this court the order dated 30.03.2017 issued fromthe office of the Principal Commissioner of IncomeTax wherein it is stated that, if an appeal is preferredquestioning the assessment, if the appellant deposits1o% of the disputed demand, as a matter of right heis entitled for stay. 6.The learned counsel brought to the noticeof this Court that, he has already deposited 19% ofthedisputedamountOT]12.06.2017|as|E47Annexure-N produced before this Court.T.In view of the facts and circumstances, itis just and necessary to direct the respondents No.1to 3 to consider the document Annexure-M dated02.05.2017|whereinthepetitioner3?;4F<723?DD9statedabout|depositOT 15%|madeby 62@'considering Annexure-M, wherein he categorically stated about as to how he has deposited 15% of thetotal demand by the department, 8.In view of the above said circumstances, itis just and necessary to direct the respondent No.1and 2? to consider Annexure-M with reference to thdeposit of 15% of the total demand and shall passappropriate orders on the said stay application filedby the petitioner within 2 days from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner is directed to furnish Annexures Mand N, along with a copy of this order to respondentsl and 2. od/-JUDGE