9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ni, counsel for the petitioner and M/s.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel, who accepts notice for the respondents and with the consent of parties, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. 2. In all these writ petitions, the challenge is to the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 220(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' in short). By the said orders, a condition has been imposed by the authority for grant of stay. 3. The first writ petition was filed in the year 2013 and an interim order has been granted by this Court on 11.12.2013, which reads as follows: "Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda, learned counsel for Income Tax takes notice for the respondents and reque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the writ petitioner to file an affidavit, by passing the following order: "Heard Mr.P.H.Arvind Pandian, learned Additional Advocate General for the petitioner and Ms.Pushpa, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2.In all the writ petitions, at the time when they were entertained, an order of interim stay was granted, by virtue of which, no coercive action could be taken against the petitioner for recovery of tax. This Court was prima facie satisfied and granted interim order on the ground that as against the orders of assessment, the petitioner filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the appeals have been taken up for hearing on 31.12.2015. 3. Th learned Additional Advocate General submits tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts and also calling for the assessing officers remand report to be filed on or before 15.3.2016. 6. From the averments made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner as well as the proceedings of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, dated 14.6.2016, it is evident that the hearing of the appeals have been concluded and all that is to be done is to pass an order. 7. The learned Standing counsel for the respondents/Department, on instructions, submitted that orders will be passed within a period of eight weeks. 8. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it would be inequitable to vacate the interim orders, which have been in force for almost 2 1/2 years in the first writ petition and for about 1 1/2 years in the other writ petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
