9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (3) TMI 732X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be dealt with by adjudicating officers - Appeal is disposed of by way of remand with specific directions. - WRIT PETITION NO. 684 OF 2010 - - - Dated:- 25-3-2010 - DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. R.A. Dada, J.D. Mistry, Jiten Jain and Rahul Jain for the Petitioner. Suresh Kumar for the Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. With the consent of counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and counsel appearing on behalf of the first, second and sixteenth respondents [The Asstt. CIT(TDS)-2(2), CIT(TDS) and Union of India respectively] the petition is taken up on board for admission and is called out for hearing. Rule, with the consent of counsel, made returnable forthwith. 2. On the request of counsel appearing on be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rst petitioner to pay an amount representing 50 per cent of the demand. The first petitioner thereupon filed an application for stay before the second respondent. On 18th Jan., 2010, 17th Feb., 2010 and 10th March, 2010 the first petitioner informed the first respondent about payments having been made, in the amount of ₹ 1.59 crores, ₹ 1.47 crores and ₹ 1.34 crores after the issuance of CBDT Circular No. 8 of 2009. The petitioner has also stated that necessary steps were being taken for obtaining IT returns/auditor's certificates for the past period from the hospitals. On 22nd Feb., 2010 the first petitioner filed a further communication with the first respondent and furnished details of payments having been made as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issuing the garnishee notices, the Asstt. CIT(TDS) 2(2) has acted in defiance of the order of stay passed by the CIT(TDS) on 19th March, 2010. Ex facie, as noted earlier, the CIT(TDS) has stayed the enforcement of the demands for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 as well as the demand towards interest. The order of the CIT(TDS) records that of the total demand of ₹ 59.06 crores the current demand was ₹ 7.69 crores for assessment year 2010-11. Despite the order of stay, garnishee notices have been issued for the entire amount which betrays a lack of application of mind. 8. That apart, it is also the grievance of the petitioners that absolutely no reason has been set out in the impugned order for declining to stay the enforc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is an unfortunate state of affairs. 9. In these circumstances, the petition will have to be disposed of and is accordingly disposed of in the following terms : (i) The garnishee notices issued on 22nd March, 2010 [annexed as Exhs. A-1 to A-25] are set aside; (ii) The order dated 19th March, 2010 passed by the CIT(TDS) to the extent to which it declines to grant a stay of the enforcement of the demand for assessment year 2010-11 is set aside; (iii) The CIT(TDS) is directed to pass a fresh order on the application for stay of the demand in relation to assessment year 2010-11 after furnishing to the assessee an opportunity of being heard; (iv) It is ordinarily not necessary for this Court to observe that the authorities o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
