Wp/6762/2009 Of Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Gruhakalpa v. The Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRILTWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENTTHE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 6762 of 2009 Between: Andhra Pradesh Housing Board "Gruhakalpa" Reptd. by its ViceChairman & Housing Commissioner, M.J. Road, Hyderabad - 500001.R/o. Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range 5 Hyderabad. Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 5 Hyderabad. 3 State Bank of Hyderabad Reptd. by its Branch Manager Gruhakalpa Branch, Nampally, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. 4 A.P. State Financial Corporation Beside Little Flower School, Chirag Ali Lane, Hyderabad. 5 Cyberabad Hitech Integrated Township Development (P) Ltd. 1009, 13th Phase, KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 1009, 13th Phase, KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 6 Indu Eastern Projects Private Limited 1009, 13th Phase, KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 1009, 13th Phase, KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the HighCourt will be pleased to issue a writ, direction or order especially inthe nature of writ of mandamus restraining the Respondents frominitiating any proceedings against the Petitioner pursuant to theAssessment Order dated 30-12-2008 passed by Respondent No.1 during the pendency of the appeal filed by the Petitioner beforeRespondent No.2. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondents: MR.B.NARASIMHA SARMA The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Learned advocate for the petitioner is permitted to deleterespondent Nos. 3 to 6. 2. Rule. Service of Rule is waived by Sri B. NarasimhaSharma, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. Looking to the facts of the case, the learned advocateshave requested the Court to take up the petition for final hearingtoday and accordingly, the petition is finally heard today. 4. The petitioner who is a Government Corporation wasaggrieved by assessment order dated 30-12-2008 for the year 2006-07 and, therefore, it has filed an appeal before respondent No. 2. Thesaid appeal is still pending. The stay application filed by thepetitioner for stay of recovery proceedings is also pending. 5. At this juncture, this petition has been filed so as to see thatthe amount sought to be recovered under the assessment order is notrecovered by using coercive method. 6. Looking to the facts of the case, in our opinion, it would bejust and proper if the appellate authority decides the appeal as soonas possible. 7. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondentshas submitted that it would be possible for respondent No. 2 todispose of the appeal within eight weeks from today, if the petitionerextends its cooperation to the appellate authority. 8. Learned advocate for the petitioner has assured this Courtthat the petitioner or its representative shall not pray for time and shall appear before the appellate authority so that the appeal can bedisposed of as soon as possible, as suggested by this Court. 9. Looking to the facts of the case, it is directed that the appealshall be decided by respondent No. 2 within eight weeks from today. 10. In view of the above direction, the amount sought to berecovered from the petitioner under the impugned assessment ordershall not be recovered till the appeal is finally decided in view of thefact that during the pendency of this petition, a sum of Rs.3.14 Croreshas already been paid or adjusted against the demand made by therespondent authorities. 8. Learned advocate for the petitioner has assured this Courtthat the petitioner or its representative shall not pray for time and shall appear before the appellate authority so that the appeal can bedisposed of as soon as possible, as suggested by this Court. 9. Looking to the facts of the case, it is directed that the appealshall be decided by respondent No. 2 within eight weeks from today. 10. In view of the above direction, the amount sought to berecovered from the petitioner under the impugned assessment ordershall not be recovered till the appeal is finally decided in view of thefact that during the pendency of this petition, a sum of Rs.3.14 Croreshas already been paid or adjusted against the demand made by therespondent authorities. 11. Intimation of this order be forwarded by the respondentauthorities to the concerned institutions to whom garnishee order hadbeen issued. 11. The petition stands disposed of as allowed with no orderas to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 8[th] April, 2009.ks RAMESH RANGANATHAN,