SHREE RAMDOOT ROLLERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS.

WPA/25970/2022HC CalcuttaWBCHCA052179202201 December 2022Author: HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Shree Ramdoot Rollers Private Limited & Anr., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Calcutta challenging an order dated November 15, 2022, which rejected their application under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This application sought to treat them as not in default regarding a tax demand. The Assessing Officer rejected the application solely on the ground that mere filing of an appeal does not automatically grant a stay of demand. The petitioners contended that their application raised several points which were not considered by the Assessing Officer.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Calcutta disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file an appropriate application for stay of the demand before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) within one week. The Court directed that if such an application is filed, the CIT(Appeals) shall consider it in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. This consideration must be done within two weeks of receiving the application. The Assessing Officer was restrained from taking coercive action for recovery of the demand for five weeks from the date of the order or until the CIT(Appeals) passed an order on the stay application. The Court noted that if the petitioners fail to file the stay application within the stipulated time, the order would have no force. The CIT(Appeals) was also urged to dispose of the pending appeal expeditiously.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessing Officer erred in rejecting the application under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by solely relying on the principle that filing an appeal does not automatically grant a stay of demand, without considering other grounds raised by the assessee? Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that their application under Section 220(6) raised several points that were not considered or discussed in the impugned order of rejection. They relied on the principle that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is empowered to grant interim relief. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Assessing Officer, rejected the application on the ground that mere filing of an appeal is not a ground for stay of any demand, which is a well-settled principle of law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 220(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1.12.

2022 ks WPA 25970 of 2022 sl. 11 Shree Ramdoot Rollers Private Limited & Anr.

Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(4), Kolkata & Ors.

Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Ld. Sr. Adv., Mr. S. Bagaria, Mr. Rites Goel … For the Petitioners.

Mr. S. Roy Chowdhury … For the Respondents.

Affidavit-of-service filed in court be kept with the record.

Heard Mr. Khaitan, learned senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Roy Chowdhury, learned Advocate appearing for the respondents.

Petitioners have filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the impugned order of rejection of the petitioners’ application dated 15th November, 2022 under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to treat the assessees/petitioners as not in default. I have perused the aforesaid impugned order by which application has been rejected by the Assessing Officer solely on the ground that mere filing of the appeal is no ground for stay of any demand which is a well settled principle of law that mere filing of appeal does not make

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 220(6)

All 51 judgments and leading authorities on Section 220(6) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →