9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (3) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time for making the payment of tax or to grant stay of realisation of demand till the disposal of the appeals, and the said discretion has to be exercised judicially and it will be apparent that respondent No. 1 has not considered all relevant factors and the impugned orders are illegal, invalid and inoperative. The present case has a chequered background indeed. In 1983, the petitioner moved a writ petition challenging the provisions of section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and a rule was issued and an interim order was granted. Section 43B was inserted by section 18 of the Finance Act, 1983, with effect from April 1, 1984. The interim order was modified to the extent that assessment proceedings may be concluded by considering secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner alleges that the impugned orders are bad in law inasmuch as the discretion has not been exercised by respondent No. 1 judicially indeed. It is further alleged that in the minutes of the 8th meeting of the informal consultative committee held on May 13, 1969, relating to stay of recovery in certain cases, there was an instruction given by the Board that the Deputy Prime Minister, at the relevant point of time, observed that where the income determined on assessment was substantially higher than the returned income, say twice the latter amount or more, the collection of tax in dispute should be held in abeyance till the decision on the appeals, provided there were no lapses on the part of the assessee. The Board, accordingly, bro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f argument that the instructions have the force of law and the interest of the assessee should not be prejudiced. The guideline as given in annexure "O" to the writ petition will have to be construed properly and respondent No. 1 has to pass necessary orders in accordance therewith. Mr. Mukul Prokash Banerjee, learned advocate, has strongly opposed the prayer for interim order as prayed for by the petitioner and he has drawn the attention of the court to the latest Instruction No. 1362 (XXVI/ 1/76-Exercise of discretion under section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act Demands disputed under first appeal pending before Appellate Assistant Commissioners/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-Clarification regarding). It reads thus: "The present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ious nor for collateral purposes nor has taken matters into consideration which are extraneous to the issue, it is not open to the High Court to interfere in its supervisory jurisdiction. This court is of the clear view further that the guideline as contained in the instruction, copy of which is annexure "O" to the writ petition, does not remain valid in view of the subsequent instructions. It is not disputed that the guidelines and/or the instructions have no impact upon the disposal of the petition under section 220(6) of the Act. The principle of law as referred to in a number of decisions cited from the Bar in support of the case of the petitioner is not in dispute. It is, however, found that the subsequent instructions make it clear th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
