Wp/4636/2020 Of Mr. Sayed Wajid Shah Hussaini v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATEKD THIS THE 1[‘T]DAY OF MARCH, 2020. BEFORE| THR HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV .WRIT PETITION No.4636/2020 (TIT) Between Mr. Sayed Wajid Shah Hussainio/o. Syed Khalander Shah Hussaini,Old Mosque Road,Arehalli, Belur Taluk,Hassan — 573 101. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Mahesh R. Uppin, Advocate) And 1.)Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)Aayakar Bhavan,No.21/6, Residency Road,Nazarbad,Mysuru 979 O10.)Aayakar Bhavan,No.21/6, Residency Road,Nazarbad,Mysuru 979 O10.) iaIncome Tax OfficerWard — 2,Ward — 2, Aayakar Bhavan, p[*#]stage, Belur Road,Hassan — 573 201. Hassan — 573 201. ... Respondents (By Sri. Jeevan J. Neeralgi, Adv. andsri. E. I. Sanmathi, Adv.)sri. E. I. Sanmathi, Adv.) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the l[)6]respondent to dispose off the appeal dt. 22.01.2020 markedaS|AnnextulriDbearingacknowledgmentNo.294336471220120 filed by the petitioner within a period ofthree months and till the disposal of the said appeal, not tomake any demand of tax. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing|this day, the Court, made the following: ORDER Petitioner is stated to be an agriculturist growingcoffee and pepper and had filed his return of income forthe assessment year 2017-18. The agricultural incomewas declared as Rs.11,01,500/- and the total incomewas declared as nil. It is submitted that petitioner’s casewas selected for limited scrutiny by the department andthe sale consideration of Rs.39,50,000/- paid by thepetitioner to his vendor with respect to a purchasetransaction relating to purchase of 9.16 acres ofagricultural land has been taken note of and as thepetitioner is stated to have had no source of income topurchase a demand draft on 04.01.2017, the said amount utilised for payment of demand draft was takenas unexplained investment. © a2It 1s submitted that after the assessment|order was passed, the petitioner is stated to have filedan appeal before the 1[)6]respondent. It is furthersubmitted that the petitioner has filed an application forstay and on the said application no orders are passedtill date. Copy of the application filed before theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is enclosed as.Annexure-E and so also copy of the application seeking ©for demand to be kept in abeyance filed before theAssessing Officer is enclosed at Annexure-F. | 3.Petitioner contends that without passing any order on the application for stay, the Department isseeking to enforce the demand as per Annexure-B. | 4In light of the appeal having been filed, thequestion of intervening as regards to the assessment order at this stage is not appropriate. However, asregards the contention that the consideration ofapplication for stay and further exercise of power of thePCIT keeping in mind the circular bearing No.1914 as.amended on 21.95.2017, 29.2.2016 and 31.7.2017, the request of the petitioner is to be considered in ameaningful manner. In fact, the power of granting stayhas been considered by the High Court of Judicature atMadras in the case ofM/s. Shriram Finance(supra)wherein, certain guidelines have been referred to inpara-S which may be taken note of. So also the mannerof exercise of power of the Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax is detailed in3Flipkart’s case (supra)aT|paras—18 and 19, which needs to be kKeptin mind. ThisCourt refrains from expressing any opinion on themerits of contentions raised. | 5.In light of the above, as the application forstay in the appeal at Annexure-E cannot be kept in abeyance indefinitely, same is to be consideredexpeditiously within a period not later than three weeksfrom the date of release of this order. In the peculiarfacts and circumstances of the case, the AppellateAuthority to consider the request for disposal of appealexpeditiously. In the interregnum, there would be stay of thedemand at Annexure-B till the Appellate Authority 5.In light of the above, as the application forstay in the appeal at Annexure-E cannot be kept in abeyance indefinitely, same is to be consideredexpeditiously within a period not later than three weeksfrom the date of release of this order. In the peculiarfacts and circumstances of the case, the AppellateAuthority to consider the request for disposal of appealexpeditiously. In the interregnum, there would be stay of thedemand at Annexure-B till the Appellate Authority considers the application of the petitioner for stay. VP Accordingly, the petition isdisposed off Sd/-. JUDGE|