9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the order rejecting interim relief by the Tribunal. 2. Consideration of strong prima facie case for stay of recovery. 3. Filing of additional documents before the High Court. 4. Granting of interim relief by the High Court. 5. Acceptance of the undertaking by the petitioner's son. 6. Directions issued by the High Court for further proceedings. Analysis: Issue 1: Challenge to the order rejecting interim relief by the Tribunal The High Court considered the challenge to the order dated 21-7-1998 passed by the Tribunal, which rejected the petitioner's application seeking an interim order of stay during the appeal. The Court emphasized the need for a strong prima facie case for granting such relief and the importance of safeguarding the revenue's interest. Issue 2: Consideration of strong prima facie case for stay of recovery The Court noted that the petitioner had filed additional documents before the High Court, which were not part of the record before the Tribunal. The petitioner argued that had these documents been before the Tribunal, a strong prima facie case in their favor would have been evident, potentially leading to a different decision by the Tribunal. Issue 3: Filing of additional documents before the High Court The petitioner explained the omission of these documents before the Tribunal by stating a belief that the Commissioner (Appeals) record would be available. The Court acknowledged the submission and considered the impact these documents could have had on the Tribunal's decision. Issue 4: Granting of interim relief by the High Court After hearing the parties, the High Court granted interim relief to the petitioner. The Court allowed the petitioner to reiterate their prayer before the Tribunal and offered to provide security to protect the revenue's interest. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and directed a fresh consideration of the petitioner's application under rule 35A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Issue 5: Acceptance of the undertaking by the petitioner's son The Court accepted the undertaking on affidavit filed by the petitioner's son, who was also the power of attorney holder. The undertaking ensured that the mentioned property would be available for recovery if the demand against the petitioner was upheld, with restrictions on encumbrance, charge, or alienation until the appeal was decided. Issue 6: Directions issued by the High Court for further proceedings The High Court issued directions for further proceedings, including staying the recovery from the petitioner until the Tribunal's decision, withdrawing orders under section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, and requesting the Tribunal to expedite the appeal's hearing and disposal within three months from the order's communication. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues addressed by the High Court and the comprehensive approach taken in resolving the matter at hand.
|
