1 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.10.2014 CORAM HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.28202 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 M/s.Viswakarma Mines & Building Materials Pvt. Ltd., New No.216, Old No.65, Shriram Bhavanam, Alwarpet Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. Rep. By its Director, Sri.S.Ganesan Son of Sivasankara Nadar ... Petitioner Vs. 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-III (1) (i/c.) 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. 2. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for records in F.No.C.C.III (1)/2014-15/AACCV4607L dated 08.10.2014 on file of 1 st respondent and quash same and further forbearing 1 st respondent from 2 initiating or continuing with any proceedings for recovery of disputed demands pursuant to orders of assessment in PAN No.AACCV4607L dated 31.03.2014 relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13 passed by him. For Petitioner : Dr.Anita Sumanth For Respondents : Mr.T.Pramod Kumar Chopda ORDER petitioner seeks for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash proceedings of first respondent dated 08.10.2014 and to forbear 1st respondent from initiating any proceedings for recovery of disputed demands pursuant to orders of assessment dated 31.03.2014 relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13. 2. petitioner is Company incorporated under Indian Companies Act,1956 and Assessee under provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. For purpose of disposal of writ petition, it may not be necessary to go into entire material factual matrix of case as set out in affidavit filed in support of writ petition, it would suffice to note 3 following facts. 3.1. As against orders of assessment dated 31.03.2014 relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13, petitioner has preferred appeals on 30.04.2014 before Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and appeals are pending. 4. This fact is not disputed by learned Standing Counsel for respondent and on instruction, he stated that appeals are pending. After filing of appeals, petitioner filed petition for stay under Section 220(6) of Act on 05.05.2014. In stay petition, petitioner raised several grounds on merits of assessment orders and as to how petitioner has prima facie case for grant of stay and that balance of convenience is in their favour for stay of recovery. 5. In stay petition, petitioner sought for stay of collection of tax pursuant to orders of assessment for relevant assessment years; not treat petitioner as Assessee in default; post petition for early disposal and afford opportunity of personal hearing. While petition was pending, by impugned proceedings, petitioner was informed that as per 4 records, there is demand of Rs.270.39 lakhs outstanding for various assessment years and petitioner was called upon to pay same on or before 16.10.2014 and in case, petitioner has already deposited amount, petitioner was advised to present before respondent and produced relevant challan and if not, petitioner was directed to take impugned communication as final notice and Department will not initiate coercive measures, if there is no compliance. Challenging proceedings dated 08.10.2014, petitioner has approached this Court submitting that respondent is not justified in issuing impugned communication when petition for stay is pending before authority, where several grounds were raised by petitioner. 6. In order to ascertain as to whether any order has been passed on stay petition filed by petitioner, this Court directed learned Standing Counsel to get instructions, by order dated 29.10.2014 and posted matter today, i.e. on 30.10.2014. 7. learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents, on instructions, would submit that stay petition is still pending and authority will pass order on petition. 5 8. It is to be noted that when petitioner/Assessee has filed appeals before appellate authority and filed stay petition raising several contentions and when there is statutory provision for filing stay petition under Section 220(6) of Act, appellate authority is expected to consider stay petition and pass reasoned order after hearing parties. In fact, petitioner has specifically sought for opportunity of personal hearing. While so, respondent is not justified in calling upon petitioner to pay demand for various assessment years. 9. In light of stand taken by respondents/Department stating that orders would be passed in stay petition, writ petition is allowed and impugned orders of first respondent dated 31.3.2014 and 08.10.2014 are quashed. respondents are directed to consider petitioner's stay petition filed under Section 220(6) of Act, on 05.05.2014 and afford opportunity of personal hearing and pass reasoned order on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 30.10.2014 6 ogy 7 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. ogy To 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-III (1) (i/c.) 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. 2. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. W.P.No.28202 of 2014 30.10.2014 M/s. Viswakarma Mines & Building Materials Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-III (1) (i/c.), Chennai/ Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Chennai