https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12706 The court set aside the rejection of the stay application under section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act, directing the Assessing Officer to reconsider it, emphasizing the need for judicious exercise of discretion. Garnishee proceedings under section 226(3) were stayed due to the improper rejection of the stay application. The validity of the search and seizure under section 132 was left for determination in subsequent proceedings. The court instructed the appellate authority to decide the appeal within three months. en-us Fri, 10 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 May 2009 13:27:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12706 The court set aside the rejection of the stay application under section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act, directing the Assessing Officer to reconsider it, emphasizing the need for judicious exercise of discretion. Garnishee proceedings under section 226(3) were stayed due to the improper rejection of the stay application. The validity of the search and seizure under section 132 was left for determination in subsequent proceedings. The court instructed the appellate authority to decide the appeal within three months. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12706