Hemant Jalan V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV and Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 16 and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(1)

WP/17861/2008

AI Insights

The case involves Hemant Jalan, the petitioner, who sought a writ of mandamus to prevent the Income Tax authorities from initiating recovery proceedings for a disputed tax until his appeal against the assessment order was resolved. The petitioner had previously filed an appeal with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad, challenging the assessment made by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Despite the appeal being pending, the authorities directed the petitioner to pay the disputed tax in installments, which led to the filing of this writ petition. The court, considering the circumstances and the pending appeal, decided to grant a stay on the recovery of the disputed tax, subject to the condition of depositing 50% of the tax.

• Counselvise Citation: [2008] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797146 (HC-ANDHRA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2008
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S R ASHOK; V R BADRI
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAVI
• Keywords: Disputed tax; Income tax appeal; Stay of collection; Writ of Mandamus

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17861 of 2008 Between: Hemant Jalan S/o. Late Sri. R.N. Jalan 6-3-1089/A/7, Gulmohar Avenue, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. 2 Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 16, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. 3 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 16(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, direction or order especially in the nature of a writ of mandamus restraining the Respondents from initiating any proceedings against the Petitioner for the recovery of the disputed tax from the petitioner until the disposal of the appeal pending before the commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondents No.: MR.S.R.ASHOK & V.R.BADRI (SC FOR INCOME TAX) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17861 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus to restrain the Respondents from initiating any proceedings against him for the recovery of the disputed tax, until the disposal of the appeal pending before the 1st respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV , Hyderabad. It is the case of the petitioner that aggrieved by the assessment order, dated 31.12.2007 passed by the 3rd respondent-Assessing Officer, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV , Hyderabad and the same is pending. The petitioner filed an application before the 3rd respondent- Assessing Officer seeking stay of collection of the disputed tax till disposal of the appeal. But the said application was rejected. Having aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the 2nd respondent. But the 2nd respondent rejected the stay petition and granted time to pay the disputed tax in installments. Hence, the petitioner filed a stay petition before the 1st respondent. But the 1st respondent, by his interim communication dated 22.7.2008, has directed the petitioner to pay the disputed demand in installments. It is also made clear that in default, the assessing officer would be free to take coercive measures. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Standing Counsel for Income Tax and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent challenging the assessment made by the 3rd respondent and the same is pending and at this juncture, if the relief of stay is not granted, and if the entire disputed tax is recovered as directed by the 1st respondent by his interim communication dated 22.7.2008, the very purpose of filing the appeal would be defeated. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 1st respondent- Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-IV , Hyderabad, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, We feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of recovery of the disputed tax, pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV , Hyderabad, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, within a period of six weeks from today. However, it is made clear that the amount paid if any, shall be given credit to the above stipulated sum. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar Date: 19th August, 2008 nn/gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 17861 of 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 19/08/2008 "