https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19176 High Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct the appellate authority to hear and decide the appeal and stay application or to restrain recovery, noting that there was nothing to show that recovery was being pressed against the petitioner. The Court did not adjudicate the merits of the underlying assessment and refused the mandatory writ relief sought. It nevertheless left the petitioner free to approach the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for disposal of the pending stay application and indicated that the Tribunal should consider it and pass an appropriate order expeditiously. en-us Fri, 28 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:03:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19176 High Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct the appellate authority to hear and decide the appeal and stay application or to restrain recovery, noting that there was nothing to show that recovery was being pressed against the petitioner. The Court did not adjudicate the merits of the underlying assessment and refused the mandatory writ relief sought. It nevertheless left the petitioner free to approach the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for disposal of the pending stay application and indicated that the Tribunal should consider it and pass an appropriate order expeditiously. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19176