Case LawHigh Court › Wp/34729/2015 Of Jawaharlal Nehru Techno...

Wp/34729/2015 Of Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University v. Commissioner Income Tax Appeals (Tds)

High Court 25 Jan 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/34729/2015 Of Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University v. Commissioner Income Tax Appeals (Tds)
Date of order
25 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wp/34729/2015 Of Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University v. Commissioner Income Tax Appeals (Tds), the High Court (2016) decided the matter.

Decision: The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHANAND THE HON’BLR SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.34729 OF 2015 ORDER: {Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan} Pursuant to a petition filed by the Revenue to vacate the interimorder passed earlier, this Writ Petition is being heard and disposed of atthe interlocutory stage with the consent of Sri T. Rajasekhar, LearnedCounsel for the petitioner, and Sri J.V. Prasad, Learned Senior StandingCounsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner hasdeposited 15% of the disputed tax, pursuant to the interim order passedby the Court earlier. The order under challenge in this Writ Petition was passed by theIncome Tax Officer on 08.06.2015 granting partial relief on thepetitioner’s application dated 20.05.2015 seeking stay of collection ofpenalty. By the order dated 08.06.2015, the petitioner was directed topay 50% of the penalty immediately as directed by the JointCommissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Visakhapatnam, for consideringgrant of stay for the balance 50% of the demand raised till the disposal ofappeals. As the said order dated 08.06.2015 is bereft of reasons, weenquired from Sri J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel forIncome Tax, as to how the said order could be sustained. LearnedSenior Standing Counsel, on instructions, would fairly state that, as thesaid order is not a reasoned order, the assessing officer would pass anorder afresh, under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, in accordancewith law. The impugned order dated 08.06.2015 is, accordingly, set aside. The Income Tax Officer shall at the earliest, and in any event not laterthan four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, passan order afresh taking into consideration the contentions raised by thepetitioner in their petition dated 20.05.2015. The amount deposited by the petitioner, of 15% of the disputed tax, shall be subject to the orders which the Income Tax Officer shall passwithin the aforesaid period of four weeks after giving an opportunity ofpersonal hearing to the petitioner. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall beno order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall standclosed. _______________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) ___________________________(M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J) 25[th] January 2016Note: Issue CC by two daysB/ORRB
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 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