IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/19TH SRAVANA, 1939 WP(C).No. 25786 of 2017 (W) PETITIONER: SUBHASH CHANDRAN.P, SHYJU COTTAGE, B.T.S ROAD, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN SMT.V.S.RAKHEE SRI.P.V.JEEVESH RESPONDENT(S): 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAUDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695003. 2. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-I, 2ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAUDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695003. 3. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (3), KAUDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695003. BY SRI. K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-08-2017, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: sdr/- WP(C).No. 25786 of 2017 (W) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23/03/2015 OF 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER SEC. 274 R/W SEC. 271 (1) (C) OF INCOME TAX ACT DATED 23/03/2015 EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 23/03/2015 OF 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P5 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P6 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 01/03/2017 IN W.P(C) 6160/2017 EXHIBIT-P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER BY IST RESPONDENT DATED 06/07/2017 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sdr/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- W.P.(C) No.25786 of 2017 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Dated this 10th day of August, 2017 JUDGMENT petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P7 conditional order of stay, passed by 1st appellate authority, in proceedings under Income Tax Act. In writ petition, it is case of petitioner that, while passing Ext.P7 order, 1st respondent, did not exercise his discretion validly. 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 3. On consideration of facts and circumstances of case and submissions made across bar, I find from perusal of Ext.P7 order that, said order was passed pursuant to directions of this Court in Ext.P6 judgment, whereby, in writ petition filed by petitioner, this Court had directed appellate authority to consider and pass orders on stay petition, within period of two months from date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. It is also made clear that, coercive proceedings will be kept in abeyance till such time as orders were passed as directed. It is relevant to note that, in Ext.P6 judgment, there was no direction to appellate authority to afford personal hearing W.P.(c).No.25786 of 2017 :2: to petitioner. On perusal of Ext.P7, I find, however, that appellate authority had sent notice dated 16.05.2017 to petitioner, fixing 12.06.2017 as date for hearing. It is seen from Ext.P7 order that, when neither petitioner nor his representative appeared for hearing on date fixed, effort was made to contact petitioner over telephone on 03.07.2017, and it is when despite said effort, petitioner did not appear for hearing, that Ext.P7 order was passed by 1st respondent. On perusal of Ext.P7 order, I do not find it to be vitiated on account of any jurisdictional error or arbitrariness, or on account of non- compliance with rules of natural justice, so as to warrant interference with same in these proceedings under Article 226 of Constitution of India. 4. learned counsel for petitioner would submit that petitioner is currently facing liquidity problems, and hence, directions in Ext.P7 order, that require him to pay 50% of balance demand outstanding in installmens, may be modified. Taking note of said plea of learned counsel for petitioner, while sustaining reasoning in Ext.P7 order, I deem it in interests of justice to modify directions therein to read that there will be stay of 70% of demand and petitioner would be required to W.P.(c).No.25786 of 2017 :3: pay only balance 30% of demand, in six equal and successive monthly installments, commencing from 20.08.2017. Save for this modification, challenge in writ petition against Ext.P7 order is otherwise, dismissed. petitioner shall produce copy of this writ petition along with copy of this judgment, before 1st respondent, for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/ Subhash Chandran. P v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thiruvananthapuram / Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-I, Thiruvananthapuram / Income-tax Officer, Ward-(3), Thiruvananthapuram