W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 BEFORE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.01.2020 CORAM HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.889 and 890 of 2020 Suresh Anuradha Petitioner vs. 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-2), Income Tax Buildings, V.P.Rathinasamy Road, Bibikulam, Madurai. 2.The Income Tax Officer, (Non Corporate Ward-1(1)), Income Tax Buildings, V.P.Rathinasamy Road, Bibikulam, Madurai. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records under DIN & Letter No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1023768103(1) on file of second respondent, dated 10.01.2020, mandating petitioner to pay 20% of disputed demand of Income Tax in respect of assessment year 2017-18 in respect to PAN Number AHFPA4358R and to quash same as illegal, void 1/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 and incompetent and to direct first respondent to dispose of appeal filed by petitioner on 09.01.2020 under Section 246A of Income Tax Act 1961 challenging order passed by second respondent under Section 246A of Income Tax Act 1961 challenging order passed by second respondent under Section 143(3) of Act by forbearing respondents from insisting petitioner to remit 20% of disputed demand of Income Tax in respect of assessment year 2017-18. For Petitioner :Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu for Mr.B.Saravanan For Respondents: Mrs.S.Srimathy ORDER This Writ Petition is filed for issuing Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash impugned order passed by second respondent vide DIN & Letter No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1023768103(1), dated 10.01.2020, mandating petitioner to pay 20% of disputed demand of Income Tax in respect of assessment year 2017-18 in respect to PAN Number AHFPA4358R and to direct first respondent to dispose of appeal filed by 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 petitioner on 09.01.2020 under Section 246A of Income Tax Act 1961 challenging order passed by second respondent under Section 246A of Income Tax Act 1961 challenging order passed by second respondent under Section 143(3) of Act by forbearing respondents from insisting petitioner to remit 20% of disputed demand of Income Tax in respect of assessment year 2017-18. 2.By consent of both parties, Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at stage of admission itself. 3.By impugned proceedings, second respondent has demanded petitioner to pay sum equivalent to 20% of levied tax on or before 17.01.2020 for entertaining appeal and stay petition under Section 220(6) of Income Tax Act 1961. Earlier, assessment order was passed on 11.12.2009 directing petitioner to pay sum of Rs.21,58,888/-. Challenging same, petitioner has preferred appeal along with petition for stay under 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 Section 226(6) of Income Tax Act 1961. For purpose of entertaining stay petition, respondents required petitioner to pay 20% of disputed demanded amount on or before 17.01.2020. demand was on basis of Office Memorandum, dated 31.01.2017. 4.The learned Counsel for petitioner submitted that there is no statutory obligation for petitioner to remit 20% of tax demanded for filing appeal. Since such condition has been put unmindful of civil consequences, learned Counsel would submit that requirement of 20% of levied tax amount without assigning any reason is illegal. However, without going into merits of case, learned Counsel for petitioner states that petitioner may be permitted to deposit 10% of demand instead of 20%, as directed in impugned order. learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents has no serious objection for this course. 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.1099 of 2020 5.Hence, this Writ Petition is partly allowed and impugned order, dated 10.01.2020 directing petitioner to pay 20% of disputed demanded amount to respondents in respect of assessment year 2017-18 is set aside. petitioner is directed to remit sum of Rs.2,00,000/- within period of 15 days from date of receipt of copy of this order. On such deposit being made by petitioner within time stipulated, order challenged before appellate authority stands stayed till disposal of appeal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index :Yes/No 22.01.2020 Internet : Yes/No cmr S.S.SUNDAR, J. Suresh Anuradha v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals-2), Madurai/The Income-tax Officer, (Non Corporate Ward-1(1)), Madurai