2011 (7) TMI 1113 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to a writ petition challenging an order under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, complexity of the matter requiring a larger Bench, and the direction for no coercive steps till the next hearing date.

Judgment Summary:

Writ Petition Challenging Order under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The writ petition challenged the order under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Due to the complexity of the issue, the matter was referred to a Larger Bench. The petitioner bank questioned the order, leading to the matter being placed before the court. The revenue's counsel mentioned that the Central Board of Direct Taxes is addressing the matter, hinting at a possible resolution. The court decided not to keep the matter pending and expected the Central Board of Direct Taxes to make a decision within three months from the date of the order. The interim order from an earlier occasion would remain in effect until a decision is made. The petitioner was given the option to challenge the Central Board of Direct Taxes' decision if dissatisfied, by approaching the court. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.

Direction for No Coercive Steps:
Regarding an application for stay, the court directed that no coercive steps should be taken in pursuance of the impugned order dated 29th March, 2011 until the next hearing date. The application for stay was accepted, and the parties were given specific timelines to file necessary documents.

Complexity Requiring a Larger Bench:
Due to the complexity of the matter, it was deemed necessary for the case to be heard by a larger Bench. The Division Bench ordered the matter to be listed before the Chief Justice for the constitution of a larger Bench. The parties were advised to come prepared with all relevant authorities for the hearing scheduled on 15th July, 2011 at 2.15 p.m.

This judgment highlights the court's handling of a writ petition challenging an order under the Income Tax Act, the direction for no coercive steps, and the decision for a larger Bench to address the complexity of the issue.