Wp/13632/2022 Of Badagabettu Credit v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01[st] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR -WRIT PETITION No.13632 OF 2022 (TIT) BETWEEN: BADAGABETTU CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD H O CHETHANA BUILDING, MISSION COMPOUND, UDUPI-576101 REP BY MR RAJESH, GENERAL MANAGER IN CHARGE (BY SRI.MAHESH R UPPIN., ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, ROOM NO.356, C R BUILDING, I P ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002. 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, ALBUQUERQUE HOUSE, OPP FORUM MALL, PANDESHWARA, MANGALURU - 575 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.03.2022 PASSED IN ORDER BEARING DIN.ITBA/AST/M/153A/2021.22/1042189076(1) PASSED BY THE R2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: “[a] Quash the Assessment Order dt: 30.03.2022 passed in Order No.ITBA/AST/M/153A/2021-22/1042189076[1] passed by the 2[nd] respondent marked as ANNEXURE-A by issuing a writ in the nature of Certiorari; OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE Stay the operation of the demand notice dt. 30.03.2022 bearing PAN No. issued by the second respondent marked as ANNEXURE-B pending disposal of appeal of the petitioner before the 1[st] respondent; [b] issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the 1[st] respondent to dispose off the appeal ANNEXURE-C filed by the petitioner Dt. 25.4.2022 bearing PAN No. within a period of two months; and [c] grant such other reliefs as may be deemed fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of equity and justice." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the reassessment order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.2-Assessing Authority under Section 143[3] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the IT Act'], the petitioner has filed an appeal in Form No.35 along with the application for Stay on 25.04.2022. In addition thereto, the petitioner has also filed application before the respondent No.2-Assessing Authority under Section 220[6] of the IT Act requesting the respondent No.2 to keep the demand in abeyance pending disposal of the appeal. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the petitioner taking necessary steps by preferring an appeal as well as by invoking Section 220[6] of the IT Act and requesting the respondent No.2 to keep the demand in abeyance, neither the respondent No.1 or the respondent No.2 are considering the request made by the petitioner nor the request for interim prayer sought for by the petitioner and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition, particularly, when the respondent No.2 has issued a Notice dated 23.05.2022 calling upon the petitioner to pay 20% of the demand amount. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the petitioner taking necessary steps by preferring an appeal as well as by invoking Section 220[6] of the IT Act and requesting the respondent No.2 to keep the demand in abeyance, neither the respondent No.1 or the respondent No.2 are considering the request made by the petitioner nor the request for interim prayer sought for by the petitioner and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition, particularly, when the respondent No.2 has issued a Notice dated 23.05.2022 calling upon the petitioner to pay 20% of the demand amount. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims in the present petition, in the appeal before the respondent No.1-Appellate Authority and also in application at Annexure-E filed by the petitioner before the respondent No.2 under Section 220[6] of the IT Act, without expressing any opinion on the merits/de-merits of the rival contentions keeping the same open, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondent No.2 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application/representation/request dated 25.04.2022 at Annexure-E submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. It is further directed that till the respondent No.2 considers and passes appropriate orders on the aforesaid representation dated 25.04.2022 at Annexure-E submitted by the petitioner referred to supra, the respondents shall not take any precipitative/coercive steps against the petitioner pursuant to Annexures-A and F dated dated 30.03.2022 and 23.05.2022 respectively. Subject to the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed off. SD/- JUDGE AN/-