Pending appeal and discretionary stay protection do not justify writ relief absent actual coercive default action.

Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 gives the Agricultural Income-tax Officer discretion, while an appeal under section 31 remains pending, to treat an assessee as not in default. The assessee had already filed a regular appeal and challenged a communication stating that the stay request could not be complied with, but no concrete coercive step to treat it as in default was shown. On those facts, the Court held that the proviso would govern any future coercive action, yet no writ relief was justified without an actual default action, and the writ petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in view of a pending appeal against the assessment, the assessee was entitled to a writ restraining the Agricultural Income-tax Officer from treating it as in default and from refusing stay of collection of tax.

Analysis: Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955, contains a proviso enabling the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, in his discretion, to treat an assessee as not being in default while an appeal under section 31 remains undisposed of. The Court noted that the petitioner had already preferred a regular appeal and that the impugned communication only stated that the stay request could not be complied with. As no concrete coercive step to treat the assessee as in default was shown to be taken, the Court held that the statutory proviso and the earlier decision relied on would govern any future coercive action, but no writ relief was warranted on the facts presented.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the prayed writ relief, and the writ petition was dismissed.

---