Court grants petition for certiorarified mandamus annulling assessment order, restraining recovery.

The court granted the petition seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, annulling the proceedings and restraining the recovery of disputed demands related to assessment orders for specific years. The petitioner, a company under the Indian Companies Act,1956, had pending appeals against these orders and had filed a stay petition under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Despite a demand for payment during the stay petition's pendency, the court directed the appellate authority to thoroughly evaluate the stay petition, provide a reasoned decision after a personal hearing, and annulled the impugned orders, instructing a reevaluation of the stay petition by the respondents.

---

---

Issues:
1. Petition seeking writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash proceedings and prevent recovery of disputed demands.
2. Company as an Assessee under Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Pending appeals against assessment orders for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13.
4. Stay petition filed under Section 220(6) of the Act.
5. Challenge against communication demanding payment while stay petition is pending.
6. Inquiry into the status of the stay petition.
7. Expectation for reasoned order on the stay petition by the appellate authority.
8. Quashing of impugned orders and direction to consider the stay petition.

The judgment concerns a petition requesting the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to annul the first respondent's proceedings and restrain them from recovering disputed demands related to assessment orders for Assessment Years 2008-09 to 2012-13. The petitioner, a company governed by the Indian Companies Act,1956, filed appeals against these orders, which are still pending. Subsequently, a stay petition was submitted under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing various grounds for granting a stay and emphasizing the need for a personal hearing. However, during the pendency of the stay petition, the petitioner was instructed to pay an outstanding amount by a specified date, leading to a challenge of this communication in court.

Following directions to ascertain the status of the stay petition, it was confirmed that the petition was still pending, awaiting a decision from the authority. The court emphasized that the appellate authority should assess the stay petition thoroughly, considering all contentions and providing a reasoned order after a personal hearing, as requested by the petitioner. As the respondents assured that a decision would be made on the stay petition, the court allowed the writ petition, annulling the impugned orders and instructing the respondents to evaluate the petitioner's stay petition, granting a personal hearing and issuing a reasoned decision in accordance with the law. The judgment concluded without imposing any costs, closing the related miscellaneous petition.

---