Court sets aside non-speaking order, directs fresh decision with hearing, stay on tax recovery.

The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the non-speaking order of the Income-tax Officer and directing a fresh decision with an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The Income-tax Officer was instructed to pass a speaking order after affording the petitioner a hearing, with a specified deadline for the decision. The recovery of the assessed tax was stayed pending the new decision, and no costs were awarded in the case.

---

---

Issues:
- Stay of recovery of assessed tax by Income-tax Officer
- Opportunity of hearing not granted before passing the order
- Non-speaking order passed without application of mind
- Setting aside the order and directing a fresh decision with an opportunity of hearing

Analysis:
The petitioner was assessed to income tax for the year 1990-91 and filed an appeal against the assessment order, seeking a stay on the recovery of the assessed tax until the appeal was disposed of. The Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 3, passed an order rejecting the application for stay of demand, stating that the demand had fallen due and the application was not made within the stipulated period. The petitioner then approached the Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, who directed the petitioner to contact the Income-tax Officer. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Income-tax Officer, alleging that no opportunity of hearing was granted before passing the order, and the order was a non-speaking one passed without proper application of mind.

The court observed that no opportunity of hearing was indeed given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order, and the order lacked reasons for rejecting the application. The court held that the order was non-speaking and required the Income-tax Officer to pass a speaking order after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. Citing a relevant authority, the court emphasized the necessity of providing reasons and granting a hearing before passing such orders.

Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order dated November 20, 1992. The Income-tax Officer, Ward No. 3, was directed to reconsider the matter, provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass a speaking order. The deadline for the decision was set, and the petitioner was instructed to appear before the Income-tax Officer for further directions. The recovery of the assessed tax was stayed until the matter was decided. No costs were awarded in the case.

---