2012 (5) TMI 28 - HC - Income Tax

Recovery proceedings - series of appeals together with series of stay petitions are pending consideration of the second respondent - Writ petitions - Held that - Directing the Appellate authority, the second respondent, to consider and pass orders on pending appeals and stay petitions filed by the respective petitioners as expeditiously as possible at any rate within four weeks of receipt of a copy of judgment - recovery proceedings stand stayed in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Assessment orders issued under the Income Tax Act for multiple assessment years.
2. Pending appeals and stay petitions before the Appellate authority.
3. Initiation of recovery proceedings based on Ext.P4 notices.
4. Interpretation of the CBDT Circular in relation to recovery proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses three separate writ petitions concerning assessment orders under the Income Tax Act for different assessment years. The petitioners had filed appeals and stay petitions against these orders, which were pending before the second respondent. Recovery proceedings were initiated based on Ext.P4 notices, prompting the petitioners to file writ petitions challenging the recovery actions.

2. The senior counsel for the petitioners argued that the recovery proceedings, as per the CBDT Circular Ext.P6, were unjustified. On the other hand, the Standing Counsel representing the respondents defended the recovery actions. The court noted that the statutory appeals and stay petitions were already under the consideration of the Appellate authority, the second respondent in the writ petitions.

3. In its decision, the court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the Appellate authority to review and decide on the pending stay petitions (Ext.P3 series) in each case along with the respective appeals within four weeks of receiving a copy of the judgment. The court ordered a stay on the recovery proceedings initiated through Ext.P4 notices until the Appellate authority's decision. The petitioners were instructed to present a copy of the judgment and the writ petitions to the Appellate authority for compliance.

4. The judgment emphasizes the importance of expeditiously resolving the pending appeals and stay petitions while ensuring that recovery proceedings are stayed in the interim. By providing clear directions to the Appellate authority, the court aims to address the concerns raised by the petitioners regarding the recovery actions taken by the tax authorities, in light of the CBDT Circular.