Wp/801/2012 Of Talpady Umashankar Shenava v. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax- Circle 6 (1) And Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.801 OF 2012 Talpady Umashankar ShenavaV/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income TaxCircle 6(1), Mumbai & Ors. ....Petitioner ...Respondents Mr.Mandar Vaidya for the Petitioner. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR AND M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.DATE : 13TH AUGUST, 2012. P.C. :- 1.Rule. Rule is made returnable and heard finally. 2.The petitioner challenged the order of the AO rejecting the application for stay of the recovery proceedings. The petitioner has also sought a stay before the CIT (A) before whom an appeal has been filed by the petitioner. That application has not been heard as yet. In the facts of this case, we do not consider it necessary to decide the issue raised in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226. It would be appropriate if the CIT(A) decides the same. 3.In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of by the following order :- i).Till the application for interim reliefs is decided by the CIT (A), the respondent shall be at liberty to take all steps to protect the rights and interest of the Revenue but shall not sell the respondent’s properties. (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.) (S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.)