2020 (9) TMI 768 - HC - Income Tax

Stay of demand - as directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the disputed amounts, as a pre-condition for stay of the remaining amount confirmed against the petitioner, pending disposal of the appeal - HELD THAT - Dispose the writ petition by quashing Exts.P4, P9 and P14 orders of the 2 nd respondent and directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3, P8 and P13 appeals within an outer time limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Also make it clear that till such time as orders are passed by the 1st respondent in the appeal as directed above, and the order communicated to the petitioner, recovery steps pursuant to Exts.P2, P7 and P12 demand notices shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 1 st respondent for further action.

Summary

Issues involved: Assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, appeals against the assessment orders, entitlement of deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, stay petitions, direction to pay disputed amounts, quashing of orders by the 2nd respondent, time limit for passing orders on appeals, abeyance of recovery steps.

Analysis:

The petitioner filed appeals against assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, claiming entitlement to deduction under Section 80P. The 2nd respondent had directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the disputed amounts for stay of the remaining amount pending appeal. The petitioner argued that similar matters had been stayed by the court without such conditions. The High Court considered the matter and quashed the orders of the 2nd respondent. The court directed the 1st respondent to decide on the appeals within six months from the date of the judgment, with recovery steps to be kept in abeyance until then.

The High Court heard arguments from both parties and noted previous court orders in similar matters. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the orders of the 2nd respondent that required payment of 20% of disputed amounts for stay of remaining payments. The court directed the 1st respondent to decide on the appeals within six months from the date of the judgment, with recovery steps to be halted until then.

In the judgment, the High Court emphasized the need for timely resolution of the appeals related to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The court set a clear directive for the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the appeals within a specified time frame of six months from the date of the judgment. Additionally, the court instructed the petitioner to provide a copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the 1st respondent for further action.

Overall, the High Court's judgment focused on ensuring a fair and efficient process for the petitioner's appeals against the assessment orders. By quashing the conditions set by the 2nd respondent and setting a time limit for the 1st respondent to decide on the appeals, the court aimed to provide clarity and relief to the petitioner while maintaining the legal procedures under the Income Tax Act.