Government undertaking ordered to pay tax demand, bank accounts unfrozen upon deposit, failure may lead to legal actions.

The court directed the petitioner, a Government undertaking, to make significant payments towards the tax demand while allowing breathing time. The freezing of bank accounts was to be lifted upon depositing a specified amount by a certain date, with subsequent monthly payments required. Failure to comply would result in reinstatement of freezing measures, with the revenue retaining the right to initiate further legal actions if conditions were violated. The judgment emphasized expeditiously resolving the pending appeal before the Tribunal, balancing financial obligations with the need to maintain essential public services.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to communications by Additional Director of Income Tax, demand recovery, appeal disposal delay, interpretation of Section 2(15) proviso, coercive steps via garnishee notice, bank account freeze, tax assessed payment, financial difficulties consideration, service paralization risk, bonafide payment requirement, public impact concern, breathing time allowance, freezing condition, appeal expeditious disposal.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged communications by the Additional Director of Income Tax and sought relief against demand recovery and delayed disposal of appeals. The main issue pertained to the interpretation of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, which was crucial for the pending appeal before the Tribunal. The immediate grievance focused on coercive actions through a garnishee notice, resulting in the freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts, leading to the paralysis of its activities.

The petitioner, a Government undertaking, faced severe consequences due to the frozen bank accounts, hindering its operations. Despite efforts to resolve the matter by approaching different authorities and making partial payments, coercive measures were initiated. The court considered the financial difficulties faced by the petitioner and the necessity to balance tax obligations with the continuity of public services provided by the petitioner.

Acknowledging the seriousness of the situation and the impact on public welfare, the court directed the petitioner to make significant payments towards the tax demand while allowing some breathing time. The freezing of bank accounts was to be lifted upon the deposit of a specified amount by a certain date, with subsequent monthly payments required. Failure to comply would result in the reinstatement of freezing measures, with the revenue retaining the right to initiate further legal actions if conditions were violated.

The judgment emphasized the importance of expeditiously resolving the appeal pending before the Tribunal, urging cooperation from both parties. The court granted permission for legal representation to be filed within a specified timeframe, ensuring procedural compliance. The overall decision aimed to balance the petitioner's financial obligations with the need to maintain essential public services, providing a structured approach to address the complex issues raised in the case.

---