Wp/35787/2012 Of M/S. Andhra Pradesh Housing Board v. Asst.commissioner Of Income Tax

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO WRIT PETITION No.35787 of 2012 Date: 12.12.2012 Between:M/s. Andhra Pradesh Housing Board,Hyderabad. AND Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle – 5(1), 6[th] Floor, Ayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad – 500 004. … Petitioner … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO WRIT PETITION No.35787 of 2012 ORDER(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram): Heard Sri S. Ravi, the learned Senior Counsel instructed by SriCh.Pushyam Kiran, the learned counsel for the petitioner – the A.PHousing Board and Sri J.V. Prasad, the learned Standing Counsel forIncome Tax for the respondent – Revenue. The petitioner in respect of the Assessment Year 2007-08 wasassessed to an income tax liability of Rs.3,29,51,82,827/- videAssessment order dated 31.12.2009. It preferred an appeal to theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – V, Hyderabad. The appealwas partly allowed by the order dated 17.02.2011. The petitionerpreferred a further appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench and along therewith an application seeking stayof recovery of the demand of Rs.3,29,51,82,827/-. The impugned order dated 10.02.2012 was passed by theTribunal rejecting the application for stay on the ground that the appealitself would be disposed of early, preferably shortly after February,2012 by which date the respective parties were directed to file paperbooks for facilitating disposal of the appeal. Even by December, 2012,the appeal has not been disposed of and meanwhile the respondentsare initiating coercive steps for recovery of a substantial amount ofnearly Rs.320 Crores from the petitioner, is the complaint. Sri J.V. Prasad, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondentRevenue states that in the facts and circumstances the petitioner bedirected to deposit some amount while directing the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal-I.T.A.No.715/HYD/2011 expeditiously. We do not consider it appropriate to make a pronouncement asto the existence and otherwise of a prima facie case in favour of thepetitioner in the appeal pending before the Tribunal as that would pre-judge the issue and might have a chilling effect on the exercise ofappellate discretion. Since the Tribunal has already indicated that the appeal wouldbe disposed of expeditiously, we consider it appropriate to direct therespondents not to initiate any coercive steps against the petitioner forrecovery of the tax as assessed and to the extent confirmed by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), pending disposal of theappeal by the Tribunal. The Tribunal may consider expeditiousdisposal of the appeal. Since it is represented at the Bar that theappeal is listed for hearing on 27.12.2012, we do not feel it appropriateto fix any specific date. Suffice it to observe that the petitioner wouldnot be entitled to any adjournment and the Tribunal may proceed withthe hearing of the appeal on the date fixed. The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage ofadmission. In the circumstances however, no order as to costs. JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Date: 12.12.2012 va JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO va WRIT PETITION No.35787 of 2012 (order of the Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Date: 12.12.2012