9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (11) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ASWAMI., RAMAPRASADA RAO. JUDGMENT VEERASWAMI J. -This petition is to direct the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle I, Coimbatore, to consider the application dated June 12, 1967, of the petitioner under section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On May 17, 1967, the Income-tax Officer communicated to the petitioner that, having regard to his representation to the Commissioner of Income-tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplained his difficulties. Noting that the petitioner did nothing thereafter, the Income-tax Officer intimated to the petitioner that the terms of big earlier letter dated May 17, 1967, could not be altered but he was prepared to give time for payment till June 12, 1967, and if there was no payment there would be no stay. Until June 12, 1967, there was thus no application before the Income-tax O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affidavit where the position taken up is that, while the Income-tax Officer would have been the proper authority to be approached for stay, and not the Commissioner himself, when once the petitioner approached the Commissioner and the latter made an order, it was the duty of the Income-tax Officer to carry out the Commissioner's orders and not to vary them. On this basis the revenue proceeds in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hibited or impliedly forbidden by the provisions of the Act. Where an Income-tax Officer is entrusted with a quasi-judicial function, no direction can be given to him by the Commissioner in exercise of his administrative superiority. Even if there is such a direction given by the Commissioner, however embarrassing it may be for the Income-tax Officer, it is his statutory duty to consider the quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n he found that the directions had not been complied with, he himself extended the time for payment. The application of the petitioner dated June 12, 1967, does not appear to be one under section 220(6). Actually it did not ask for any stay on any terms but only wanted the Income-tax Officer to appreciate his difficulties and be sympathetic towards him. We consider, therefore, that there being no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
