This is Miscellaneous Petition of revenue praying for vacation of conditional stay granted by Tribunal, for reason of assessee's failure to comply with conditions imposed therein. 2. learned representative for revenue submitted that: Tribunal directed assessee to pay Rs. 10 lakhs, at Rs. 2.5 lakhs per month commencing from December, 2005; and for balance demand to offer adequate security to satisfaction of Assessing Officer. assessee paid only two instalments of Rs. 2.5 lakhs each on 19-12-2005 and 6-4-2006, respectively, and did not pay rest of instalments as directed. assessee also did not offer any security to satisfaction of Assessing Officer in respect of demand; as directed by Tribunal. Tribunal fixed appeal for early hearing on 20-12-2005, besides submitting that assessee shall not seek any adjournment on that date of hearing. Contrary to such condition, imposed by Tribunal, assessee sought for adjournment on 20-12-2005 and 16-1-2006 as well as on 1-2-2006, i.e., from time to time as aforesaid. Hence, this is fit case where conditional stay granted by Tribunal has necessarily to be vacated besides directing assessee to pay whatever is due to be paid to Department in consonance with Tribunal order, apart from vesting Department with right to recover balance amount of demand that is liable to be paid by assessee. 3. On other hand, learned counsel for assessee countered by submitting that: Assessee borrowed amount of Rs. 1,62,000 as loan from Standard Chartered Bank on 19-7-2005 and Rs. 2 lakhs from Citi Bank on 17-2- 2006. Assessee, in spite of attempts, could not obtain any personal loan from any other bank, particularly in view of fact that immovable property held by him is under attachment under section 281B of Act. He could neither mortgage property and obtain loan nor could obtain any personal loan from any bank. Therefore, amounts of Rs. 2.50 lakhs each during January to March, 2006 could not be paid. Since properties are under attachment, Bank did not accept property for providing security for obtaining loans and assessee did not have liquid funds also. Therefore, he could not pay rest of instalments of Rs. 2.5 lakhs each. For very same reason of attachment of properties under section 281B of Act, no other security could be given to Assessing Officer. As for prayers of adjournments in appeal are concerned, some of papers; are with assessee's auditor, who did not provide original copies of documents, as they were misplaced and therefore, assessee could not provide any relevant details to Advocate. Therefore, adjournments had to be sought for. Thus, assessee could not comply with conditions contained in stay order of Tribunal which is for reasons beyond assessee's control. In circumstances, therefore, for non-compliance with directions of Tribunal's order, unconditional apology is tendered by assessee. 4. In reply, learned representative for revenue submitted that: If such would be difficulties as submitted by assessee, assessee could have and should have on its own moved before Tribunal by way of Miscellaneous petition explaining those difficulties and for extension of time by seeking modification of conditional stay order got by assessee from Tribunal. While so, assessee cannot simply keep quite and circumvent by sneakily wriggling out of conditions imposed by Tribunal, as it causes deprivation to Department of its entitled dues under conditional stay order passed by Tribunal, apart from resulting in total disobedience of very same conditional stay granted by Tribunal. Hence, stay granted by Tribunal deserves to be vacated, apart from assessee being directed to pay forthwith defaulted instalments due under conditional stay order, apart from vesting Department with its right to proceed with recovery of balance amount. 5. learned counsel for assessee rejoined that assessee would p y not only defaulted instalments, but even balance outstanding demand within period of two months, in full. 6.1 Rival submissions heard and relevant orders read. Indeed and in fact, w e appreciate Department for having been alert in matter, which must continue to be so in each and every matter by filing petition for vacating stay and for having brought to notice of Bench as to how assessee has violated conditions imposed by Tribunal and also pin pointing that even if assessee would have any difficulty in complying with orders of Tribunal, he could have and should have approached Tribunal duly explaining reason therefor, and got order of Tribunal modified by convincing Tribunal for extension of time, which has not been done in instant case. 6.2 cat has come out slowly from its bag from assessee, only when revenue filed its petition for vacating conditional stay granted, for reasons as aforementioned by it in this Miscellaneous Petition, which has not been disputed by assessee, even though some reasons for inability to obey order of Tribunal was stated by assessee by swearing affidavit subsequent to hearing of this Miscellaneous Petition, when questions were put to assessee against him, and giving opportunity to assessee therefor. Indeed and in fact, it was pronounced in open court after hearing both parties that Miscellaneous Petition is allowed by appreciating department and its learned representative, with costs on part of assessee. 6.3 However, as assessee did not and could not dispute its violations as pointed out by revenue, and yet prayed for opportunity to be given to explain as to why and how it could not obey order of Tribunal, Tribunal gave such opportunity to assessee, but imposing condition that whatever that would be submitted by assessee, has to be sworn in affidavit, which was accordingly done by assessee subsequently as aforesaid. 6.4 We have gone through affidavit. In spite of assessee's attempt t o explain justifying circumstances as unavoidable on part of assessee which disabled him from complying with conditions imposed by Tribunal, while granting stay, specific question of learned representative for revenue as to why and how assessee could not file petition for modification of order by explaining its difficulties and circumstances, as are now highlighted before Bench and that too only after revenue has filed its Miscellaneous Petition for vacating stay, remained unanswered. Even now in affidavit of assessee, not whisper for reason therefor has been made out by assessee. It was also stated by revenue that conditional stay granted by Tribunal would also be expiring by operation of law within week's time from original date of hearing of this Miscellaneous petition. However, on that original date itself, it was pronounced, as already stated, that Miscellaneous Petition of revenue was allowed with costs. 6.5 Yet, opportunity was given to assessee, since assessee pleaded not to award costs, to assess bona fide nature of reasons that would be sworn by assessee in affidavit for purpose of determining quantum of costs as Bench felt that if cost is not awarded in such cases where specific violation of conditions laid down in Tribunal order has been committed, it would amount to encouraging disrespect to Tribunal orders by assessee tempting thus not only other assessees but also Department too to do so. Indeed, it is duty of Bench to protect and maintain its dignity and decorum in eyes of public, as it is also its duty, as guardian, to protect and maintain dignity and decorum of both parties' learned representatives too before Tribunal as and when warranted and required by facts and circumstances. 6.6 Still, no reply has come from assessee in regard to question posed by revenue as to why and how assessee could not come before Bench prior to this Miscellaneous Petition for modification of conditional stay granted earlier seeking extension of time, explaining his difficulties, if beyond control, which has been stated only now and subsequent to revenue's Miscellaneous Petition to vacate conditional stay. 6.7 In circumstances, we deem it fit and proper for reasons detailed above, as already pronounced, to allow petition of revenue by awarding costs. Considering difficulties expressed and sworn in affidavit by assessee, with which we are convinced, as Department too perhaps being convinced since no coercive step seems to have been taken even though Tribunal has earlier pronounced in open court that petition of revenue was allowed against assessee with costs, and further fact that assessee assured to pay not only defaulted instalments but also balance outstanding demand within period of two months, we quantify costs to be awarded at nominal sum of Rs. 100 (Rupees One Hundred) only, which shall be paid by assessee to Department immediately, sending behind it signal of warning to parties that whatever be circumstance order of forum must be obeyed by parties before it. 7. In result, Miscellaneous Petition of revenue is allowed with costs. *** INCOME TAX OFFICER v. I. SESHAGIRI RAO