Prompt disposal of tax appeals ordered, pending appeal decisions crucial for determining liability. Compliance required.

The court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to promptly dispose of appeals where written submissions were filed, allowing time for written arguments in remaining cases. The court stayed the order pending appeal decisions, emphasizing the pending appeals' importance in determining liability. The judgment highlighted vendors' primary tax liability, cautioning the petitioner as an assessee in default. Parties were instructed to comply with the court's order, closing pending applications. The court clarified its decision would not impact appeal outcomes before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) denying complete stay on demands raised by Assessing Officers.
2. Applicability of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the withholding tax demands.
3. Dispute regarding the classification of free samples provided to distributors and stockists under a sales promotion scheme.
4. Arguments on the liability for tax deduction at source on payments made for commission, professional fees, and contractor payments.
5. Appeals filed with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the Assessing Officers' orders.
6. Request for stay on demands pending the decision in the appeals.
7. Legal implications of the demands raised and the consequences of non-deduction of tax at source.
8. Court's direction on the disposal of the pending appeals and the stay on the impugned order.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The writ petitions challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) denying complete stay on demands raised by Assessing Officers, instead granting stay subject to payment of 15% of the demand. The petitions contested the applicability of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act to the withholding tax demands, particularly regarding free samples and other payments.

2. The Assessing Officers concluded that tax should have been deducted at source on free samples provided to distributors and stockists under a sales promotion scheme. Additionally, there were disputes over tax deductions on payments for commission, professional fees, and contractor payments, leading to demands under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act.

3. The petitioner argued that the demands should not be enforced pending the appeals with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). They contended that the cost of free samples cannot be considered as commission or brokerage, and the withholding tax demands were not applicable, though other consequences like interest and prosecution might apply.

4. The court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the appeals where written submissions had been filed promptly. For the remaining appeals, the petitioner was given time to submit written arguments. The court stayed the impugned order pending the appeal decisions and clarified that the outcome of the appeals would determine the petitioner's liability.

5. The judgment emphasized that the liability for tax primarily rests on the vendors, and the petitioner would face consequences as an assessee in default, subject to provisions of the Act. The court refrained from expressing a final view on the matter pending the appeal decisions, highlighting the importance of the pending appeals in determining the petitioner's fate.

6. The parties were instructed to act based on the digitally signed copy of the court's order, and the writ petitions were disposed of with the pending applications closed. The judgment reiterated that the appeal outcomes before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) would not be affected by the court's decision.

---