Wtax/218/2020 Of Allahabad Development Authority(Now Prayagraj Development Authority) v. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income -Tax(Exemptions) And 5 Others

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 218 of 2020 Petitioner :- Allahabad Development Authority(Now Prayagraj Development Authority) Through Its Finance Controller Respondent :- The Pr. Commissioner Of Income -Tax(Exemptions) And 5Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar Garg,Ashish Bansal,Shalini Goel Counsel for Respondent :- S.S.C.,Abhishek Mishra,Ashish Kumar Srivastava,Gaurav Mahajan Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Heard Sri Ashish Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner andSri Gaurav Mahajan learned Standing Counsel for therespondent nos. 1, 2 and 3. This writ petition relates to recovery of income tax dues for theassessment year 2017-18. The assessment order dated27.12.2020 was passed by the respondent no.2 for theassessment year 2017-18 creating certain demand. As aconsequential action to recover the demand the respondentdepartment has issued an attachment order dated 07.02.2020.The petitioner has challenged the assessment order in appealunder Section 246-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before theCIT (A), Prayagraj, which is stated to be pending. Aggrievedwith the attachment order dated 07.02.2020 and pressing ofdemand, during the pendency of appeal the petitioner has filedthe present writ petition. Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Standing Counsel for the IncomeTax Department has made a statement that after recovery of20% of the disputed amount the impugned attachment orderdated 07.02.2020 has been lifted and the account attached hasbeen released by order dated 20.02.2020. Thus the relief (a) and(c) does not survive in the present writ petition. So far as relief(b) is concerned it cannot be granted at this stage inasmuch asthe petitioner may apply for interim relief before the CIT (A). Though apart learned Standing Counsel for the Income TaxDepartment has stated that since 20% of the demand has beenrecovered therefore at present the respondents do not intent topress further recovery till disposal of the appeal of the petitionerpending before the CIT (A). The last relief sought by the petitioner is that petitioner's appealbefore the CIT (A) may be directed to be decided within a timebound period. Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department has no objection to the aforesaid prayer of thepetitioner. Under the circumstances we direct that the respondent no. 3 todecide the appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law,expeditiously preferably within a period of two months fromthe date of presentation of a certified copy of this order. Therespondent no. 3 on submission of copy of this order by thepetitioner shall fix a date in the appeal of the petitioner andshall make effort to decide the appeal within a stipulated periodof time. With the aforesaid observation the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 7.8.2020Pravin