TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 371
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the Indian Overseas Bank, Chandannagar Branch, respondent No. 4. Incidentally, the pro forma respondent No. 8 is a partnership firm in which the petitioner is a partner. 2. The facts relevant for adjudication are that for the assessment year 2007-08 the petitioner had filed her income-tax return. The return was scrutinized. OnDecember 24, 2009assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed by the said respondent. Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), XXXVI, Kolkata, respondent No. 3. Thereafter, onFebruary 11, 2010the petitioner filed an application for stay before the said respondent in respect of the demand for the said assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed and are on record. 4. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner relying on the statements in the writ petition and in the reply, has submitted that as no copy of notice of attachment was served on her as postulated under section 226(3)(iii) of the Act, the action of the said respondent in issuing the notices of attachment and in debiting a sum of Rs. 1,66,000 from the account maintained with respondent No. 4 is illegal. As evident from paragraph 8 of the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Revenue, notice was served on the asses-see after order of attachment was passed. Further, as appeal has been preferred against the order of assessment and the same is pending, the action of the said respondent in issuing the no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the account of his client, the firm is seriously prejudiced and appropriate order may be passed directing refund. 8. Admittedly, for the assessment year 2007-08 onDecember 24, 2009order of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was passed by the said respondent. Being aggrieved, onJanuary 22, 2010the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No. 3. Thereafter, onFebruary 11, 2010an application for stay under section 220(6) of the Act for the assessment year 2007-08 was filed before the said respondent. It appears that onFebruary 10, 2010the income-tax authorities had issued four notices under section 226(3) of the Act upon the concerned branches of the Indian Overseas Bank, Syndicate Bank, Bank of India and Central ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that an appeal had been filed against the assessment order for the assessment year in question. In my view, once onFebruary 11, 2010the factum of filing of appeal was made known to the said respondent, the said respondent ought to have disposed of the stay application without proceeding further with the attachment notices. It is to be noted that section 220(6) of the Act postulates that where an appeal under section 246 or 246A is pending, the Assessing Officer has the discretion, subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose in the circumstances of the case, to treat the assessee as not being default in respect of the amount in dispute in the appeal as long as such appeal remains pending, even though the time for payment has e....