1993 (2) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... part of the learned Departmental Representative to the petition being proceeded with on the ground that the assessee had not exhausted the remedies available to it before the tax authorities. Attention was invited to the non-availability of written orders from the Commissioner vis-a-vis assessee's application dated25-1-1993 addressed to him. 2. The learned counsel countered this by stating that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n support of this proposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Susanta Kumar Nayak v. Union of India [1990] 185 ITR 627. 4. On the merits of the case the learned counsel contended that the assessee had a prima facie good case before the Tribunal and the demand of Rs. 1,94,768 (including Rs. 1,06,290 as interest) was likely to be wiped off. 5. The Depa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inds that the tax authorities are not responding to the urgency of the matter and rather than acting on assessee's request for stay one way or the other are taking coercive measures. In the present case the Tax Recovery Officer had issued " SUMMONS " requiring assessee's presence on19-1-1993inviting attention to section 32 of the Civil Procedure Code which inter alia provided for a fine of Rs. 10, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X