Wp(C)/6228/2017 Of Giridhari Gaana v. Principal Commissionerof Income Tax,Bbsr

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 201724.04.2017 Heard Mr.G.M.Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Acharya, learned Senior S 24.04.2017 Heard Mr.G.M.Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Acharya, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the order of assessment for the year, 2013-14, a demand came to be raised and against the said demand, the statutory appeal under Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act has come to be filed. After filing of the appeal, the petitioner moved the Assessing Officer under Sub-Section (6) of Section 220 of the Income Tax Act seeking stay of demand pending disposal of the appeal. The said order came to be rejected by the assessing officer under order dated 22nd February, 2017 and confirmed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Bhubaneswar by order dated 20.3.2017. Consequently, the assessing officer raised demand under Annexure-6 dated 29.3.2017 demanding the petitioner to deposit the entire demanded dues. Mr. Acharya learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department submits that the petitioner ought to have moved before the Principal Commissioner if he was in any manner aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Officer instead of moving the Joint Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner brings to our notice the Revised Guidelines issued by the C.B.D.T. relating to stay of demand at the First Appeal Stage. The relevant portion is quoted hereunder: x x x Under the revised guidelines, where the outstanding demand is disputed before Commissioner (Appeals), the assessing officer shall grant stay of demand till disposal of first appeal on payment of 15% of the disputed demand. In case, any deviation from the standard pre-payment of 15% is proposed by the Assessing Officer, he shall refer the matter to the administrative Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, who after considering all relevant facts shall decide the quantum/proportion of demand to be paid by the assessee as lump sum payment for granting a stay of the balance demand. In a case, where stay of demand is granted by the Assessing Officer on payment of 15% of the disputed demand and the assessee is still aggrieved, he may approach the jurisdictional administrative Principal Commissioner or Commissioner for a review of the decision of the assessing officer. This decision of the Board is expected to provide significant relief to the taxpayers in matters relating to grant of stay and recovery of demand by reducing arbitrariness in the disposal of stay petitions where the tax demand is contested at the First Appellate stage. X x x It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 15% of the disputed demand before the income tax authority. Considering the submissions made and considering the over all aspects of the matter, this Court sets aside the order of the Joint Commissioner as well as of the Assessing Officer impugned before us and grant liberty to the petitioner to make an offer before the Assessing Officer for making necessary deposit of 15% of the disputed tax amount. When such an application is moved, the Assessing Officer shall do well to be guided by the directive issued by the CBDT (Revised Guidelines) as noted hereinabove and pass necessary orders for enabling the petitioner to comply with the said deposit. Once such deposit is made, balance demand shall remain in abeyance till disposal of the first appeal by the appellate authority. Consequently, the orders under Annexures-4 and 6 stand quashed. The matter stands remitted back to the assessing officer. With such observation and direction, the writ application is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned Senior Standing Counsel. .. I. Mahanty, J. ... under Annexures-4 and 6 stand quashed. The matter stands remitted back to the assessing officer. With such observation and direction, the writ application is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned Senior Standing Counsel. .. I. Mahanty, J. ... Biswajit Mohanty, J. List this