Court dismisses Writ Petitions challenging tax assessment orders for failure to seek stay.

The court dismissed the Writ Petitions filed by a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society challenging assessment orders for multiple Assessment Years due to the petitioners' failure to seek a stay on the disputed tax amounts as required by law. The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedures and seeking interim protection from the relevant authority promptly. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed following the dismissal of the Writ Petitions.

---

---

Issues:
1. Assessment orders passed under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for multiple Assessment Years.
2. Non-payment of disputed arrears of tax leading to threats of coercive action by the tax authorities.
3. Petition seeking a mandamus to prevent coercive action by the authorities.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners, identified as a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society, challenged assessment orders for various Assessment Years, which were under appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioners had not sought a stay on the disputed tax amounts, as required under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, nor had they applied for interim protection. The court noted that the demand raised in the assessment orders was payable unless stayed by the relevant authority. As the petitioners had not taken necessary steps to seek a stay, the court found no merit in their plea and dismissed the Writ Petitions.

2. Due to the non-payment of the disputed tax arrears, the tax authorities had issued communications threatening coercive action for recovery. The petitioners sought a mandamus to restrain the authorities from taking such action. However, the court held that in the absence of a stay on the demand, there was no basis for granting the requested relief. The court emphasized that the petitioners could approach the appropriate authority for interim protection, and any such application should be dealt with promptly within four weeks in accordance with the law.

3. In conclusion, the court dismissed the Writ Petitions as the petitioners had not followed the necessary procedures to seek a stay on the disputed tax amounts. The court advised the petitioners to approach the relevant authority for interim protection if desired, ensuring that such applications would be processed within a specified timeframe. The judgment did not award any costs to either party, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed as a result of the final disposal of the Writ Petitions.

---