TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 1124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 18.10.2019 passed by respondent No. 1 and the order dated 21.11.2019 passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the application of the petitioner for complete stay of demand arising out of the order passed by the assessing officer under section 115Q read with section 115O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-18 till disposal of appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 47 i.e. respondent No. 3. 3. This Court on 12.12.2019 passed the following order:- "Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Place the petition on board on 3 January 2020 for final disposal. It is open for the Respondents to file their reply affidavit before the next date. 3. We have considered the earlier orders passed on 14 August ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpugned order dated 14th March, 2010 passed by the Assessing Officer, then all incidence of an appeal would equally apply in the case of the Petitioner. It is also not disputed that once the Petitioner has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), it is open to the Petitioner to make appropriate application before the Authorities under Section 220 (6) of the Act, for stay of the demand till the final disposal of the appeal before the CIT(A). It would, therefore, be open to the Petitioner to take such measures as are available under the Act to obtain an appropriate order, seeking a stay of the recovery of the demand confirmed by an order dated 14th March, 2019. Looking at the huge demand and the attitude of the Revenue in curtailing the normal pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... file a fresh writ petition. 6. Mr. Mistri, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order dated 18.12.2020 passed by the Tribunal and submits that though the Tribunal had fixed hearing of the appeal on 18.01.2021, no hearing took place on that day because of adjournment sought for by the revenue. Referring to paragraph 7 of the said order, he submits that Tribunal had noted the contradictory stand taken by the assessing officer. On the one hand, the assessing officer is bent on effecting recovery of the dues but on the other hand, he is saying that no coercive action would be taken in view of pendency of the writ petition and the stay granted therein. Therefore, the moment the writ petition is disposed of as infructuo....