2023 (1) TMI 324 - HC - Income Tax

Court sets aside assessment order, directs fresh orders within 6 weeks, emphasizing adherence to legal principles.

Trichy District Lorry Owners Association Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Dealers Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department, The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Office of the Income Tax Officer, Trichy

Trichy District Lorry Owners Association Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Dealers Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department, ... Issues involved:Challenge to order under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding stay application.Detailed Analysis:1. Facts of the Case: The petitioner, an Association of persons running a Petrol Bunk, received a notice under Section 142(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for filing a correct Income Tax Return. An assessment order was passed assessing the total income and levying a tax under Section 69A of the Act. The petitioner's contention regarding acceptance of demonetized currency was rejected in the assessment.2. Adverse Assessment Order and Stay Application: The petitioner filed an appeal against the assessment order and a stay application. Despite the pending appeal and stay application, recoveries were made, leading to the filing of a writ petition seeking a refund. The Court directed the 3rd Respondent to dispose of the application under Section 220(6) of the Act, referencing relevant judgments.3. Grounds of Challenge in Stay Application: The stay application raised various grounds, including lack of opportunity, improper invocation of provisions, and non-consideration of relevant facts and laws. The petitioner argued that the impugned order did not account for the amount already recovered and was cryptic and non-speaking.4. Court's Observations and Decision: The Court found the impugned order arbitrary and perverse for disregarding the trinity principles laid down in previous judgments. Despite discretionary nature, the Court held that interference was warranted due to the order's arbitrary nature. The impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to pass fresh orders considering the trinity principles within six weeks.5. Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with no costs imposed, and no further proceedings were allowed against the petitioner until the stay application was re-evaluated. The Court emphasized the importance of following established legal principles in such matters for a fair and just decision.