9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 1414 - HC - Income TaxStay petitions - Held that - I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing second appeals. True, before the Tribunal, stay petitions are pending. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petitions. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the fourth respondent considers the stay petitions.
Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders, Coercive steps before appellate authority, Stay petitions in second appeals. Analysis: The petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, challenged the assessment orders before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), resulting in subsequent orders. Subsequently, the petitioner challenged these orders in the second appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner also filed stay petitions in the appeals. The petitioner filed a writ petition expressing concern that coercive steps were being taken by the authorities before the appellate authority could address the stay petitions. The High Court acknowledged that the petitioner had timely filed second appeals. Emphasizing procedural fairness, the Court noted that the authorities should wait for the appellate authority to decide on the stay petitions before taking further coercive steps. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondent authority to refrain from coercive actions until the Appellate Tribunal considers the stay petitions. Additionally, the Court expressed hope that the Appellate Tribunal would promptly address and dispose of the stay petitions. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment focused on ensuring procedural fairness in tax matters by directing authorities to wait for the appellate authority to decide on stay petitions before taking coercive actions. This case underscores the importance of allowing the appellate process to unfold without premature enforcement actions, thereby safeguarding the rights of the petitioner in challenging assessment orders.
|
