Radhey Shyam Jaiswal Vs Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and Another

Allahabad High Court 20 Aug 1991 Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 1146 of 1991 (1992) 198 ITR 623
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 1146 of 1991

Hon'ble Bench

R.R. Misra, J; A.P. Misra, J

Advocates

Vikram Gulati, for the Appellant; Bharatji Agarwal, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Disposed Of

Acts Referred

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 271(1)

Judgement Text

Translate:

A.P. Misra, J.@mdashHeard learned counsel for the petitioner and also Sri Bharatji Agarwal, senior standing counsel for the Revenue.

2. The present writ petition is for a mandamus directing the Income Tax (Appellate) Tribunal), Allahabad, to decide the stay application of the

petitioner pending before it for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1986-87, and for further directing the Assistant Commissioner, Investigation,

Circle I (1), Kanpur, to stay the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act pending before him.

3. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on May 4, 1990, and also moved an application for stay on May

23, 1991, which is still pending before the said authority. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in spite of the stay application

of the petitioner being pending, the respondent-authority concerned has initiated penalty proceedings against the petitioner and hence the present

writ petition.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we find and, accordingly, direct the respondent-authority concerned either to decide the stay

application dated May 23, 1991, or the appeal aforesaid itself filed by the petitioner before it within a period of one month from the date of

producing a certified copy of this order by the petitioner before the said authority. The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order along with

another copy of the aforesaid stay application before the said authority concerned within two weeks from today.

5. The petitioner, after the disposal of the appeal/stay application aforesaid, shall also intimate the assessing authority concerned the consequence

of the said appeal/stay application within two weeks thereafter.

6. Until the disposal of the said appeal/stay application, penalty proceedings pending before the Assistant Commissioner, Investigation, Circle I (1),

Kanpur, for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1986-87 as against the petitioner shall remain stayed.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is finally disposed of.

8. A certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within two days.

From The Blog
Supreme Court Halts GST Assessment on Joint Development Deals
Oct
28
2025

Story

Supreme Court Halts GST Assessment on Joint Development Deals
Read More
Supreme Court Explains Demurrer Law in Neelkanth Realty Case
Oct
28
2025

Story

Supreme Court Explains Demurrer Law in Neelkanth Realty Case
Read More