Interim stay protection bars fresh assessment action; orders passed in breach were set aside and remanded.

Assessment orders passed while an interim stay in an earlier writ petition remained operative could not be sustained, because the authorities were bound to respect the restraint on further proceedings unless they first sought variation or vacation of that order. The fact that the petitioner had not fully complied with directions to appear and produce records did not authorise the authorities to ignore the subsisting interim protection. The proper course was to treat the orders as having been passed in breach of the restraint, set them aside, and remit the matter to the Assessing Authority for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether assessment orders passed during the currency of an interim stay granted in the earlier writ petition were liable to be set aside and remanded for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The earlier interim order directed the authorities to keep further proceedings under the impugned notice on hold until disposal of the writ petition, subject to the petitioner's obligation to appear and produce records. Though the petitioner had not complied fully with the direction to appear and produce records, the authorities were still bound by the restraint against proceeding further unless they first sought variation or vacation of the interim order. The assessment orders were therefore made when the interim order was operating. In the circumstances, the proper course was to avoid giving effect to the orders passed during the subsistence of the restraint and to send the matter back for reconsideration.

Conclusion: The assessment orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for fresh consideration.

Ratio Decidendi: An authority cannot proceed with adjudication in disregard of an operative interim restraint order; if non-compliance by the party is alleged, the proper course is to seek vacation or modification of the interim order before acting further.

---