Court orders respondent to resolve appeal by deadline, bars action on dues, lifts bank account attachment. Refund conditions apply.

The court directed the fourth respondent to resolve the petitioner's appeal by 28.02.2014. The petitioner was instructed not to pursue the Rs.3,03,71,740 refund until the appeal's resolution. Respondents were barred from taking precipitative actions on outstanding dues and were ordered to lift the attachment on other bank accounts immediately. If the petitioner failed before the fourth respondent, the respondents could adjust the refund or initiate recovery proceedings lawfully.

---

---

Issues:
1. Modification of communication dated 29.10.2013 and direction against respondent No.1 from recovering balance taxes.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought modification of a communication dated 29.10.2013 and a direction against respondent No.1 to prevent the recovery of balance taxes. The petitioner had appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) challenging an order under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. During the appeal, the third respondent instructed the petitioner to remit 50% of the demand, threatening recovery actions under the Act. The petitioner's bank accounts were even attached. An interim order lifted the attachment on one bank account. The petitioner requested to withhold coercive actions until the appeal's disposal.

The petitioner's counsel stated that the total outstanding dues were Rs.4,13,64,121, with Rs.1,06,82061 under stay order. A partial payment of Rs.12,00,000 was made, leaving a balance of Rs.1,94,82,061. The petitioner claimed a refund of Rs.3,03,71,740 for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14, agreeing not to press for it until the appeal's resolution. Respondents argued that the petitioner's request should be contingent on the appeal's outcome, suggesting an expedited disposal without pressing for the refund claim.

Consequently, the court directed the fourth respondent to resolve the petitioner's appeal by 28.02.2014. Until then, the petitioner was instructed not to pursue the Rs.3,03,71,740 refund. Respondents were barred from taking precipitative actions on the outstanding dues and were ordered to lift the attachment on other bank accounts immediately. The writ petitions were disposed of under these terms, with a caution that if the petitioner failed before the fourth respondent, the respondents could adjust the refund or initiate recovery proceedings lawfully.

---