Court orders prompt consideration of stay petition despite procedural error; impact on garnishee notice under Income Tax Act

The court directed the appellate authority to consider the petitioner's stay petition within a reasonable time despite a procedural error in filing. The outcome of the evaluation would impact the garnishee notice issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Writ Petition was disposed of without costs, with instructions for the petitioner to share the court's order with the appellate authority for compliance and communication purposes.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging garnishee notice under Income Tax Act, 1961; Typographical error in the notice; Appeal against intimation and rectification order; Failure to pay outstanding dues; Filing stay petition before appellate authority; Delay in decision by appellate authority; Filing writ petition for relief; Jurisdiction to grant stay by appellate authority; Direction to consider stay prayer; Timely consideration by appellate authority; Impact on garnishee notice; Disposal of Writ Petition; Communication of order to respondent.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged a garnishee notice issued by the 2nd respondent under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, directed at the 6th respondent, Axis Bank Limited, Hyderabad, for attaching the petitioner's bank account. A typographical error in the notice was corrected through a Corrigendum, specifying different assessment years and amounts due. The petitioner had filed its income tax return for the assessment year 2019-20, received an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, and subsequently a rectification order under Section 154, leading to an appeal by the petitioner against both. However, the outstanding dues were not paid, prompting the garnishee notice.

The petitioner sought a stay of demand by filing a petition before the 4th respondent, the appellate authority. Faced with a lack of decision by the appellate authority and ongoing garnishee proceedings, the petitioner filed a writ petition. The court noted that the stay petition was filed under Section 220(6) of the Act, which should have been before the assessing officer, but emphasized that the appellate authority has the power to grant interim relief related to appeals, including stay. Despite the procedural error, the court directed the appellate authority to consider the stay prayer within a reasonable time after providing an opportunity for a hearing to the petitioner.

The court instructed the 4th respondent to evaluate the stay prayer by a specified date and clarified that the outcome would affect the garnishee notice. The Writ Petition was disposed of with no costs imposed, and any pending miscellaneous applications were closed. The petitioner was directed to share a copy of the order with the 4th respondent within seven days of receipt to ensure compliance and communication of the decision.

---