Wp/17861/2008 Of Hemant Jalan v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARIand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17861 of 2008 Between: Hemant Jalan S/o. Late Sri. R.N. Jalan6-3-1089/A/7, Gulmohar Avenue, Raj Bhavan Road,Somajiguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, 3rd Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.2 Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 16,Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.3 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(1), AayakarBhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of Indiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filedherein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ,direction or order especially in the nature of a writ ofmandamus restraining the Respondents from initiating anyproceedings against the Petitioner for the recovery of thedisputed tax from the petitioner until the disposal of theappeal pending before the commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondents No.: MR.S.R.ASHOK &V.R.BADRI (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI& THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking awrit of mandamus to restrain the Respondents from initiatingany proceedings against him for the recovery of the disputedtax, until the disposal of the appeal pending before the 1[st]respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV,Hyderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by theassessment order, dated 31.12.2007 passed by the 3[rd]respondent-Assessing Officer, the petitioner filed an appealbefore the 1[st] respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad and the same is pending. Thepetitioner filed an application before the 3[rd] respondent-Assessing Officer seeking stay of collection of the disputedtax till disposal of the appeal. But the said application wasrejected. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner fileda revision petition before the 2[nd] respondent. But the 2[nd]respondent rejected the stay petition and granted time topay the disputed tax in installments. Hence, the petitionerfiled a stay petition before the 1[st] respondent. But the 1[st]respondent, by his interim communication dated 22.7.2008,has directed the petitioner to pay the disputed demand ininstallments. It is also made clear that in default, theassessing officer would be free to take coercive measures.Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitionerand the learned Special Standing Counsel for Income Tax andperused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for thepetitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 1[st] respondent challenging the assessment made by the3[rd] respondent and the same is pending and at this juncture,if the relief of stay is not granted, and if the entire disputedtax is recovered as directed by the 1[st] respondent by hisinterim communication dated 22.7.2008, the very purpose offiling the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view ofthe fact that the appeal is pending before the 1[st] respondent-Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad, withoutexpressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it afit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certainconditions. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for thepetitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 1[st] respondent challenging the assessment made by the3[rd] respondent and the same is pending and at this juncture,if the relief of stay is not granted, and if the entire disputedtax is recovered as directed by the 1[st] respondent by hisinterim communication dated 22.7.2008, the very purpose offiling the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view ofthe fact that the appeal is pending before the 1[st] respondent-Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad, withoutexpressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it afit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certainconditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of thedisputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the 1[st]respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV,Hyderabad, subject to the condition of the petitionerdepositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of sixweeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amountpaid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition isdisposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice P.V. Sanjay KumarDate: 19[th] August, 2008nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARIand THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17861 of 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. MeenaKumari) 19/08/2008