IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL WEDNESDAY, 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020(B) PETITIONER/S: PRAVEEN SIDHARTHAN PILLAI, AGED 48 YEARS VRINDAVANAM, THODIYOOR NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN -690 523. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -III, ALAPPUZHA, ARATTUKULANGARA COMPLEX, ADJACENT TO ALAPPUZHA MEDICAL COLLEGE, A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA, PIN-688 011. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), KOTTAYAM, 1ST FLOOR, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 001. 3 PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 018. 4 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, RAJPATH MARG, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSE JOSEPH SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2020, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 JUDGMENT Dated this 18th day of March 2020 petitioner, on account of having been engaged in business of commission and brokerage is assessee of income tax. For assessment year 2017-18, declared his total income of Rs.3,78,980/-. aforementioned return was selected for scrutiny and petitioner was served with notice under Section 143(2) and 142(1) in light of CASS observations. petitioner furnished relevant documents in response to aforementioned notices, however, 1st respondent rejected explanations and evidences and passed assessment order, dated 28.12.2019 creating exorbitant demand of Rs.67,00,030/- vide Ext.P1. 2. learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits against aforementioned order, demand order in Ext.P3 and penalty notice 3 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 Ext.P4 under Sec.274 read with Sec.270A were also issued. As per remedies available under income tax Act, petitioner preferred statutory first appeal vide Ext.P5 against assessment order before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 27.01.2020 Ext.P5 along with stay application dated 13.02.2020. Since provisions of Income Tax also enables petitioner to seek demand of assessment as per provisions of Section 220(6) of Income Tax Act, application in this regard was also preferred before Income Tax Officer/Assessing officer, which resulted into order impugned Ext.P7 dated 06.03.2020. He submits that order sans any reason and despite demand has been stayed subject to condition of deposit of 20% of demanded amount, which is reflected from notice dated 06.03.2020 Ext.P8. counsel for petitioner further submits, though Act provides availment of remedies as noticed above, since 4 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) is taking up appeals year-wise i.e as per seniority, stay application filed along with it are also not taken out of turn. It is in that circumstances, remedy of Sec.220(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961 was availed. 3. Issue notice before admission. Mr. Jose Joseph, learned standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents and submits that petitioner has invited order and therefore he cannot seek interim stay. In view of circular of 2017, he is required to deposit 20% of demanded amount, in order to proceed with stay and protect himself from liability of depositing entire amount including penalty. 4. Having heard counsels for parties and apprised papers, I am of view that, this court while dealing in such matters, have come across many writ petitions preferred by assessees, seeking intervention of this court under Art.226 for issue for 5 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 direction and taking up applications for interim stay filed along with pending appeals. Even this court was apprised that Appellate Authority are taking up appeals, considering predicament of such assessees including petitioner, directions having been issued, for consideration of at least interim application and by keeping coercive measures in abeyance. 5. In instant case appeal filed has not been taken up rather interim application, in such circumstances availed remedy under Sec.220(6) 1961 Act, which resulted into impugned order Ext.P7, I am of view that, order prima facie do not reflect any application of mind except reference to contentions. officers who are competent to pass orders, are enjoined obligations to pass reasoned orders, which, according to affected party, may not be sustainable in accordance with law. But such orders, if are passed in routine, cannot escape from 6 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 judicial scrutiny of this court. Be that as it may, in order to prevent further mis-carriage of justice and in interest of justice, I deem it appropriate issuing directions to 2nd respondent to take call on application for interim stay in support of appeal Ext.P5 and take decision thereon after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner in accordance with law, un-influenced by findings referred to Ext.P7. Until such time demand as raised Ext.P8 is ordered to be kept in abeyance. Let this exercise be taken within 45 days from date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. It is made clear that interim stay shall be only till adjudication of interim application and not beyond. writ petition in above mentioned directions stands disposed of. AMIT RAWAL JUDGE SM 7 WP(C).No.8414 OF 2020 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28/12/2019 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT U/S.143(3) OF ACT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28/12/2019 PURSUANT TO EXT.P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER, ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF PENALTY NOTICE U/S 274 READ WITH SEC. 270A OF ACT, ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF PENALTY NOTICE SEC. 274 READ WITH SEC. 271AAC(1) OF ACT, ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF FIRST APPEAL DATED 27/01/2020, FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13/02/2020 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER U/S.220(6) OF ACT, DATED 06/03/2020 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 06/03/2020 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. Praveen Sidharthan Pillai v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-III, Kerala / Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kottayam / Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Kerala / Union of India