TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 1208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....business or for that matter no business of any kind can be run on mere bank guarantees. Liquid cash is necessary for the running of a Government as indeed any other enterprise. We consider that where matters of public revenue are concerned, it is of utmost importance to realize that interim orders are not to be granted merely because a prima facie case has been shown. More is required. The balance of convenience must be clearly in favour of the making of an interim order and there should not be the slightest indication of a likelihood of prejudice to the public interest". (Assistant Collector of Central Excise vs. Dunlop India Ltd. & Ors., 1985 (1) SCC 260) 3. The aforesaid are the observations of the Supreme Court relating to the tendency of the courts to grant interim orders with great potential for public mischief for the mere asking. Such tendency was deprecated by the Supreme Court almost four decades back. 4. Having regard to the subject matter of the captioned writ applications, the Revenue wants us to keep the aforesaid observations of the Supreme Court in mind. 5. For the sake of convenience, the Special Civil Application No.19804 of 2021 is treated as the lead matter. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....may also be granted." 7. The facts, giving rise to this litigation, may be summarized as under; 7.1 The writ applicant is one of the directors of the entities following under the Avani Group of Companies. The said group of companies operates from Vadodara and is engaged in the business of land and properties. 7.2 A search was conducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act, 1961") on 23.01.2020 by the respondent No.4. The said search ultimately led to issue of a notice to the writ applicant herein under Section 153(A) of the Act, 1961 dated 09.12.2020 calling upon the writ applicant to furnish the return of income for the A.Y.2014-15 to 2019-2020. 7.3 The record reveals that separate notices were also issued under Section 153(A) of the Act by the respondent No.4 dated 09.12.2021 calling upon the writ applicant to furnish the return of income for the A.Y.2010-11 to 201314. For the A.Y.2020-21, notice came to be issued to the writ applicant by the respondent No.4 under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 17.06.2021. The respondent No.4, thereafter, issued questionnaire under Section 142(1) of the Act for all the aforesaid assessment years, i.e. 201011 to 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o, Harsh Dipak Shah 11/12, Charotar Society, Old Padra Road Vadodara, Gujarat India PAN: ASGPS8965A Dated: 08.12.2021 DIN & Letter No: ITBA/COM/F/17/2021-22/1037618617(1) Sir / Madam/M/s, Subject: Online service of orders-Letter Sub:-Hearing on application of stay against recovery of demand raised u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3) & 143(3) of the Act in your case for A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.20202021 till the disposal of the 1st appeal-Reg. Ref: Assessee letter dated 08.11.2021 received in this office on 10.11.2021. Please refer to the above 2. In connection to above captioned subject, it is seen from the perusal of your letter dated 08.11.2021 that stay of demand has been sought on the ground that an appeal has been filed before CIT(A) against the Assessment Order passed in your case u/s. 153A r.w.s. 143(3) & 143(3) of the I.T.Act, 1961 (to be read as 'Act') pertaining to A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.2020-2021 and a decision on the appeal is expected soon for the relevant assessment years. The aforesaid Assessment Order has resulted in raising demand in your case as tabulated below; Sr. No. Order under section of I.T.Act, 1961 A.Y. Dt. of order As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessment order passed in your case by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) for the year under consideration was after granting sufficient opportunities during the assessment proceedings and the A.O. after duly perusing and verifying the submissions made by you with details available on record and proper appreciation of details provided as well in view of relevant provisions of the Act had passed the Assessment Order. Hence, demand cannot be stayed specially in view of the fact that this instruction has been issued in supersession of all instruction of the subject. Though the demand is disputed but mere filing of 1st appeal before the CIT (A) cannot be valid reason for granting stay. 5. However, following the principle of natural justice, I am directed to give you an opportunity to be heard that why your stay application should not be rejected as you have not paid 20% of the above mentioned raised demand in view of the Board Instruction No.1914 dated 21.03.1996 & 31.07.2017. Further, it can be considered that you may be granted installments to pay 20% of the raised demand with detailed as under:- Sr.No. Order under section of I.T. Act, 1961 A.Y. Dt. Of order Demand Raised (in Rs.) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....very of demand, the assessee has filed a petition before assessing officer on 11.10.2021, however, without considering the facts and circumstances , he has rejected the request of the assessee to grant stay against recovery of demand vide his letter dated 02.11.2021 and has directed the assessee to pay 20% of demand, i.e, Rs. 74,64,08,464/- immediately. The assessee has further requested your honour to grant stay of demand until disposal of an appeal vide letter dt. 08.11.2021, however, your honour also has directed to the assessee to deposit 10% of total demand before 31.12.2021 and remaining 10% of demand before 15.03.2022, in equal monthly installment (Summary break up is as under) Total Demand 20% of total demand Direction to deposit tax on or before 31.12.2021 15.01.2021 15.02.2021 15.03.2021 373,20,42,319 74,64,08,464 37,32,04,232 12,44,01,411 12,44,01,411 12,44,01,411 Sir, first of all, it is mentioned that the assessing officer has framed the assessment without in-depth verification of the whole case. The impugned assessment order and demand is not only harsh but is also without due consideration to the facts of the case including the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d off, the assessee would discharge his obligations, if any, arising on account of disposal, in favour of the department. We shall be grateful if the stay against the demand is granted. Thanking You, Yours Faithfully," 7.9 Thus, the writ applicant prayed for waiver of 20% of the pre-deposit essentially on four grounds (i) high pitched assessment (ii) only source of income through Avani Petrochem Pvt. Ltd. (iii) stereo type order passed by the Principal Commissioner and (iv) adverse effect on the financial affairs due to the Covid-19 pandemic. 7.10 We take notice of the fact that the total demand raised is to the tune of Rs. 373,20,42,319/-. 20% of the said amount towards pre-deposit comes to Rs. 74,64,08,464/-. 7.11 The aforesaid reply of the writ applicant dated 15.12.2021 did not find favour with the respondent No.2 herein and vide order dated 17.12.2021 disposed of the stay application. The order dated 17.12.2021 reads thus; To, Harsh Dipak Shah 11/12, Charotar Society, Old Padra Road Vadodara, Gujarat India PAN: ASGPS8965A Dated: 08.12.2021 DIN & Letter No: ITBA/COM/F/17/2021-22/1037913180(1) Sir / Madam/M/s, Subject: Onli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... affairs of the business are adversely affected across the globe and recovery proceedings may again affect the assessee adversely. 3. in respect of reasons quoted in above para 2(i), 2(ii) & 2(iii), it is stated that same are not applicable as they are merely pertaining to the matter discussed during the assessment proceedings. Assessment order passed in your case by the AO for the year under consideration was after granting sufficient opportunities during the assessment proceedings and the AO after duly perusing and verifying the submissions made by you with details available on record and proper appreciation of details provided as well in view of relevant provision of the Act has passed the Assessment Order. Further, the reason quoted in para 2(iv) above cannot be accepted as the Government has introduced various facilities to the business men in order to overcome the pandemic effect on financial status. Further, in para-(ii) above you yourself have admitted that the turnover of the company is above 100 crores in last financial year of 2020-21 which clearly indicates that the business of your company is in progressive mode. It is also pertinent to mention that only claim of f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 30.09.2021 25290654 4. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2013-14 30.09.2021 186990485 5. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2014-15 30.09.2021 133940038 6. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2015-16 30.09.2021 227276710 7. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2016-17 30.09.2021 279814290 8. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2017-18 30.09.2021 1568798260 9. 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2018-19 30.09.2021 436268606 10 . 153A r.w.s.143(3) 2019-20 30.09.2021 421328404 11 . 143(3) 2020-21 30.09.2021 286522898 Total 3732042319 6.1 If you follow the schedule payment as mentioned in above table then no action will be taken to recover the remaining demand till the end of the financial year or receipt of decision of CIT(A) whichever is earlier. 6.2 If no compliance of tax payment is received from you as scheduled above, then you would be treated as assessee deemed to be in default and the AO would be within his rights to make all possible recovery proceedings as per I.T. Act 1961 against you to collect the outstanding demand. 6.3 Your stay application is accordingly disposed off. Charanjeet Singh Gulati PCIT (Central), Surat Copy to:- 1. The Addl. CIT, Central Range, Vadodara for monitoring the payment of d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ided by the CBDT circulars/instructions issued time to time. Such circulars and instructions are in the nature of guidelines and are issued to assist the Assessing Authority in the matter of grant of stay and cannot substitute or override the basic tenets to be followed in the consideration and disposal of the stay applications. Mr. Hemani invited the attention of this Court to Para-4 of the impugned order dated 17.12.2021, wherein the respondent No.2 has referred and relied upon an office letter dated 08.12.2021 providing guidelines for staying the demand. The argument of Mr. Hemani is that the respondent No.2 has looked into only one such letter for being guided as regards the stay of demand. He would argue that the error on the part of the respondent No.2 is writ large as reflected in para-5 of the impugned order wherein it is stated that the office letter dated 08.12.2021 supersedes all earlier instructions issued by the CBDT on the subject. This, according to Mr. Hemani, is something erroneous. 13. Mr. Hemani took us through the various circulars and notifications on the subject. He invited our attention first to the Instruction No.96 dated 21.08.1969. Thereafter, he took us ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(from A.Y.2010-11 to A.Y.2018-19) have been concluded by the assessing officer after in depth scrutiny and the assessing officer did not comment adversely anywhere in the assessment order regarding transactions. Still, the Respondent No.4 has concluded the post search assessment covering all the transactions for which assessments u/s.143(3) were completed in earlier period and that too without any basis and or justification. (vii) That the respondent No.4 has made replication/ duplication leading to dual addition in several transactions which has led to the assessment going more than 100 times the returned income. The recovery sought to be made by way of the assessment orders is nothing but inflated transactions which have no basis in law. (viii) That the petitioner has negative income/losses and a copy of the unaudited/provisional profit and loss and balance sheet showing loss to the extent of Rs. 4 Crores up till 31.03.2021 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-K. (ix) That the entire conclusion had been drawn by the respondent No.4 on the basis of material seized from the one Ashwinbhai which was in the form of a diary wherein rough notes were maintained. The said Ashwi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, Mr. M.R. Bhatt, the learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue has vehemently opposed this writ application submitting that no error, not to speak of any error of law, could be said to have been committed by the respondent No.2 in declining to waive 20% of the pre-deposit amount in exercise of his discretion under Section 220(6) of the Act. 18. Mr. Bhatt would submit that the respondent No.2 could be said to have passed the impugned order of grant of conditional stay by keeping in mind all the relevant considerations and once such an order is passed in exercise of his discretionary power, this Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, should be loath to interfere with the same. Mr. Bhatt would argue that the CBDT Instructions No.95 dated 21.08.1969, on which, reliance is placed on behalf of the writ applicant is no more in force as the same stood superseded by the Instruction No.1914 dated 28.07.2020. Mr. Bhatt laid much emphasis on the fact that pursuant to the search operations, the assessments were carried out which resulted into substantial tax demands. This is one major factor which Mr. Bhatt wants this Court to keep in mind vis-a-vis the argument of the writ appl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....piry of the due date under sub- section (1), the Assessing Officer may extend the time for payment or allow payment by installments, subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose in the circumstances of the case." 25. Sub-section (4) of Section 220 reads thus; "(4) If the amount is not paid within the time limit under sub- section (1) or extended under subsection (3), as the case may be, at the place and to the person mentioned in the said notice the assessee shall be deemed to be in default." 26. The plain reading of sub-section (4) as above would indicate that if the amount is not paid within the time limit under sub-section (1) or within the extended time limit under sub-section (3), as the case may be, the assessee would be deemed to be in default. A legal fiction of being deemed to be in default has been provided in the statute. 27. Sub-section (6) of Section 220 reads thus; "(6) Where an assessee has presented an appeal under section 246, [the Assessing] Officer may, in his discretion, and subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose in the circumstances of the case, treat the assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount in dispute i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....power by the authority concerned or in a given case, the authority may not act prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. However, when it comes to grant of a discretionary relief like stay of demand, it is but obvious that the four basic parameters need to be kept in mind (i) prima facie case (ii) balance of convenience (iii) irreparable injury that may be caused to the assessee which cannot be compensated in terms of money and (iv) whether the assessee has come before the authority with clean hands. 30. The power under Clause (6) of Section 220 is indeed a discretionary power. However, it is one coupled with a duty to be exercised judiciously and reasonably (as every power should be), based on relevant grounds. It should not be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously or based on matters extraneous or irrelevant. The Income-tax Officer should apply his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case relevant to the exercise of the discretion, in all its aspects. He has also to remember that he is not the final arbiter of the disputes involved but only the first amongst the statutory authorities. Questions of fact and of law are open for decision before the two appellate authoritie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be taken into consideration. The amount involved is also a relevant factor. If it is a heavy amount, it should be presumed that immediate payment, pending an appeal in which there may be a reasonable chance of success, would constitute a hardship. The Wealth-tax Act has just come into operation. If any point is involved which requires an authoritative decision, that is to say, a precedent, that is a point in favour of granting a stay. Quick realisation of tax may be an administrative expediency, but by itself it constitutes no ground for refusing a stay. While determining such an application, the authority exercising discretion should not act in the role of a mere tax-gatherer." 32. In the case on hand, unfortunately, the respondent No.2 has not considered anything and has just mechanically declined to grant relief as prayed for by the writ applicant. When the writ applicant pointed out to the respondent No.2 that the case on hand is one of high pitched assessment, the same came to be dismissed by the respondent No.2 by merely saying that the issue has been discussed threadbare during the assessment proceedings. In other words, the finding recorded by the respondent No.2 is that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der the fiscal statute, arrived total income as Rs. 59,91,680/-. Thereby, the respondent determined income on assessment substantially higher than the returned income of Rs. 4,91,680/-, by way of 14 times, made assessment arriving total income of Rs. 59,91,680/-. Therefore, the assessment made by the respondent is a High Pitched Assessment." 34. In context with the high pitched assessment, we may also refer to a decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Soul vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2010) 323 ITR 305 (Delhi), wherein a Division Bench of the High Court observed in Para-9 as under; "Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the view that although Instruction No. 1914 of 1993 specifically states that it is in super-session of all earlier instructions, the position obtaining after the decision of this Court in Valvoline Cummins Ltd. (supra) is not altered at all. This is so because para No. 2(A) which speaks of responsibility specifically indicates that it shall be the responsibility of the AO and the TRO to collect every demand that has been raised "except the following", which includes "(d) demand st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Instruction reads as follows: 1222. Income determined on assessment was substantially higher than returned income Whether collection of tax in dispute is to be held in abeyance till decision on appeal 1. One of the points that came up for consideration in the 8th meeting of the Informal Consultative Committee was that income-tax assessments were arbitrarily pitched at high figures and that the collection of disputed demands as a result thereof was also not stayed in spite of the specific provision in the matter in Section 220(6). 2. The then Deputy Prime Minister had observed as under: ...where the income determined on assessment was substantially higher than the returned income, say, twice the latter amount or more, the collection of the tax in dispute should be held in abeyance till the decision on the appeals, provided there were no lapse on the part of the assessed. 3. The Board desire that the above observations may be brought to the notice of all the Income tax Officers working under you and the powers of stay of recovery in such cases up to the stage of first appeal may be exercised by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax. 41. A pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... arbitrarily pitched at higher figures and that the collection of disputed demand as a result thereof was also not stayed in spite of the specific provision in the matter in s. 220(6) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. The then Deputy Prime Minister had observed as under : ".........Where the income determined on assessment was substantially higher than the returned income, say twice the latter amount or more, the collection of the tax in dispute should be held in abeyance till the decision on the appeal provided there were no lapses on the part of the assessees." 3. The Board desire that the above observations may be brought to the notice of all the Income tax Officers working under you and the powers of stay of recovery in such cases up to the stage of first appeal may be http://www.judis.nic.in exercised by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax.' 9. Thereafter, Instruction No.1914 was issued by the CBDT on 21.03.1996 and states as follows: 1. Recovery of outstanding tax demands[Instruction No. 1914 F. No. 404/72/93 ITCC dated 2-12-1993 from CBDT] The Board has felt the need for a comprehensive instruction on the subject of recovery of tax demand in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....review petitions before them as a matter of routine or in a frivolous manner to gain time for withholding payment of taxes. C. Guidelines for staying demand: i. A demand will be stayed only if there are valid reasons for doing so. Mere filing an appeal against the assessment order will not be a sufficient reason to stay the recovery of demand. A few illustrative situations where stay could be granted are: It is clarified that in these situations also, stay may be granted only in respect of the amount attributable to such disputed points. Further where it is subsequently found that the assessee has not cooperated in the early disposal of appeal or where a subsequent pronouncement by a higher appellate authority or court alters the above situation, the stay order may be reviewed and modified. The above illustrations are, of course, not exhaustive. ii. In granting stay, the Assessing Officer may impose such conditions as he may think fit. Thus he may - a. require the assessee to offer suitable security to safeguard the interest of revenue; b. require the assessee to pay towards the disputed taxes a reasonable amount in lump sum or in instalments; c. require an undertaki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....officer shall be held responsible for ensuring compliance with these instructions. 4. This procedure would apply mutatis mutandis to demands created under other Direct Taxes enactments also.' 10. Instruction 1914 was partially modified by Office Memorandum dated 29.02.2016 taking into account the fact that Assessing Officers insisted on payment of significant portions of the disputed demand prior to grant of stay resulting in extreme hardship for tax payers. Thus, in order to streamline the grant of stay and standardize the procedure, modified guidelines were issued which are as follows: '....... (A) In a case where the outstanding demand is disputed before CIT (A), the assessing officer shall grant stay of demand till disposal of first appeal on payment of 15% of the disputed demand, unless the case falls in the category discussed in pars (B) hereunder. (B) In a situation where, (a) the assessing officer is of the view that the nature of addition resulting in the disputed demand is such that payment of a lump sum amount higher than 15% is warranted (e.g. in a case where addition on the same issue has been confirmed by appellate authorities in earlier years or t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evised to 20% of the disputed demand, where the demand is contested before CIT(A). Thus all references to 15% of the disputed demand in the aforesaid O.M dated 29.2.2016 hereby stand modified to 20% of the disputed demand. Other guidelines contained in the O.M. dated 29.2.2016 shall remain unchanged. These modifications may be immediately brought to the notice of all officers working in your jurisdiction for proper compliance.' 12. The Circulars and Instructions as extracted above are in the nature of guidelines issued to assist the assessing authorities in the matter of grant of stay and cannot substitute or override the basic tenets to be followed in the consideration and disposal of stay petitions. The existence of a prima facie case for which some illustrations have been provided in the Circulars themselves, the financial stringency faced by an assessee and the balance of convenience in the matter constitute the 'trinity', so to say, and are indispensable in consideration of a stay petition by the authority. The Board has, while stating generally that the assessee shall be called upon to remit 20% of the disputed demand, granted ample discretion to the authority to eith....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....convenience and irreparable injury. (b) Notwithstanding that the assessee may not have specifically invoked the three parameters, referred to above, for the grant of stay, it is incumbent upon the assessing officer to examine the existence of a prima facie case as well as call upon the assessee to demonstrate financial stringency, if any, and arrive at the balance of convenience. 38. The principles relating to the exercise of discretion by an authority are expounded in various decisions of the Supreme Court. We may refer to few decisions. 39. In the case of Sant Raj and Anr. v. O.P. Singla and Anr.: (1985) 2 SCC 349, the Supreme Court dealt with the matter as regards the discretion of the Labour Court to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement and observed as under; "4.....Whenever, it is said that something has to be done within the discretion of the authority then that something has to be done according to the rules of reason and justice and not according to private opinion, according to law and not humor. It is to be not arbitrary, vague and fanciful but legal and regular and it must be exercised within the limit to which an honest man to the discharge of his office ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ond the jurisdiction of the court. 13. In the instant case, the Corporation has denied itself the discretion to offer an alternative job which the regulation requires it to exercise in individual cases of retrenchment. ......It may be stated that the statutory discretion cannot be fettered by selfcreated rules or policy. Although it is open to an authority to which discretion has been entrusted to lay down the norms or rules to regulate exercise of discretion it cannot, however, deny itself the discretion which the statute requires it to exercise in individual cases. ...... xxx xxx xxx "15.......Every discretion conferred by statute on a holder of public office must be exercised in furtherance of accomplishment of purpose of the power. The purpose of discretionary decision making under Regulation 17(3) was intended to rehabilitate the disabled drivers to the extent possible and within the abovesaid constraints. The Corporation therefore, cannot act mechanically. The discretion should not be exercised according to whim, caprice or ritual. The discretion should be exercised reasonably and rationally. It should be exercised faithfully and impartially. There should be proper va....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er sub-section (6) should ordinarily be exercised in favour of assessee, unless the overriding and overwhelming reasons are there to reject the application of the assessee under Section 220(6) of the Act. The application under Section 220(6) of the Act cannot normally be rejected merely describing it to be against the interest of Revenue if recovery is not made, if tax demanded is twice or more of the declared tax liability. The very purpose of filing of appeal, which provides an effective remedy to the assessee is likely to be frustrated, if such a discretion was always to be exercised in favour of revenue rather than assessee. 46. We are of the view that the authorities should keep in mind the following parameters while deciding a stay application preferred by an assessee pending appeal to the First Appellate Authority. These are the parameters as laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of Kec International Ltd. vs. B.R. Balakrishnan, (2001) 251 ITR 158/119 Taxman 974; a) While considering the stay application, the authority concerned will at least briefly set out the case of the assessee. (b) In cases where the assessed income under the impugned order far exceeds the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Income Tax Officer made under s. 220 was arbitrary and capricious". No other particulars were given by the respondent in his writ petition to show in what way the order was arbitrary or capricious. In the counter- affidavit the allegations of the respondent have been denied in this respect. We are of opinion that in the absence of specific particulars by the respondent in his writ petition it is not open to the High Court to go into the question whether the Income Tax Officer has arbitrarily exercised his discretion. In the result we hold that the respondent is unable to substantiate his case that the impugned notice is in any way defective with regard to item no. 1 i.e., tax for the assessment year 1960-61 amounting to Rs. 7,056.15." 48. Thus, what is sought to be conveyed by the Supreme Court is that the writ applicant, in the memorandum of his writ application, must furnish specific particulars in support of his case that the Income-tax Officer has exercised his discretion in arbitrary manner. It is just not sufficient to make an averment in the memorandum of the writ application that "the order of the Income-tax Officer made under Section 220 is arbitrary and capricious".....