9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd dissatisfied with the order of assessment passed by the AO for Assessment Year 201011 dated 20.03.2013 with respect to the tax liability of Rs. 12,19,04,650/-, the petitioner assessee had preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), which is pending final disposal by the learned CIT(A). That as the petitioner assessee was before the Commissioner (Appeals) by way of appeal, the petitioner assessee submitted the application before the AO under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") and requested not to treat the assessee in default with respect to the amount/demand of tax, interest etc. pursuant to the assessment order, during the pendency of appeal before the learned CIT(A). That the AO passed the order dated 26.11.2013 and directed the petitioner assessee to make the payment of Rs. 2.25 crores on or before 31.01.2014 in three installments as under: 1. 1st Installment of Rs. 50,00,000/- by 30.11.2013 2. 2nd Installment of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- by 31.12.2013 3. 3rd Installment of Rs. 75,00,000/- by 31.01.2014 It appears that in the aforesaid order dated 26.11.2013, the AO also observed that the assessee shall cooperate in early disposa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsolutely illegal and most arbitrary. It is submitted that as such the petitioner did deposit the amount which was required to be deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the directions issued by the Commissioner dated 21.02.2014. It is submitted that therefore the AO ought not to have and could not have issued the communication dated 27.03.2014 threatening the petitioner assessee to take coercive recovery measures with respect to the balance demand and as such ought not to have directed the petitioner assessee to pay the balance demand by 20.03.2014 (next day of the said communication). It is further submitted that as such there was no noncooperation on the part of the assessee in not proceeding further with the appeal before the learned CIT(A). It is submitted that as such it was the AO who did not submit the comments to the learned CIT(A) and therefore, the hearing of the appeal by the learned CIT(A) was delayed. It is further submitted that in the communication dated 27.03.2014 the AO has issued the said direction on the basis of the instructions from the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot that though the representative of the assessee was telephonically requested to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o allow the present special civil application and quash and set aside the impugned communications more particularly the communication at AnnexureA dated 27.03.2014. 5. In response to the notice issued by this Court, Shri Pranav G. Desai, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent. An affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. It is submitted that so far as the impugned order / communication dated 27.03.2014 is concerned, it was on the basis of the instructions given by the concerned Jurisdictional Commissioner - Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot. An affidavit is filed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot. The sum and substance of the affidavit filed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot in support of his instructions to the AO on the basis of which the impugned communication has been issued by the AO dated 27.03.2014 is that there was a pressure from the higher authorities to recover the maximum amount of tax prior to the relevant financial year i.e. 31.03.2014. It is submitted that in the present case as the amount of demand involved was more than Rs. 12 crores and the petitioner assessee deposited only a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es by the end of financial year i.e. on or before 31.03.2014 to be paid in two installments. It is not in dispute that as such the petitioner had deposited the further sum of Rs. 2 crores as directed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot within the stipulated time / extended period granted by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot. It appears that thereafter due to some pressure from the higher authorities (so stated in the affidavit in reply filed by the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Rajkot), the learned Commissioner decided to review its earlier order of directing the petitioner to deposit a further sum of Rs. 2 crores and on that the petitioner to continue the stay and/or to treat the petitioner assessee not in default and called upon the assessee's representative telephonically and requested the learned AR to attend the office for review. It appears that the learned AR did not attend the office of the Commissioner. Therefore, despite the fact that the petitioner assessee did deposit the entire amount of Rs. 2 crores as directed by the Commissioner, the Commissioner issued the direction to the AO by observing as under: "It is seen from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on nonpayment of the amount of Rs. 2 crores before the end of the financial year as discussed with the AR on 21.02.2014 immediately, the same may result in coercive measures. Under the circumstances, as such the challenge to the communication dated 03.03.2014 is not warranted and/or justified. 7. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present petition succeeds. The impugned communication / order dated 27.03.2014 of the AO is hereby quashed and set aside. It is reported that the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is not being proceeded further as the AO has not responded to and/or has not send the comments to the reply submitted by the assessee to the comments submitted by the AO. Under the circumstances, the AO to submit the comments to the reply submitted by the petitioner assessee to the comments submitted by the AO as demanded by the learned CIT(A) within a period of 15 days from today and thereafter the learned CIT(A) to finally decide and dispose of the appeal preferred by the assessee thereafter within a period of six weeks and in any case on or before 15.09.2014. 7.1 In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the impugned communication / order da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
