THE OTTOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ,, vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the direction issued to the fourth respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and deferring the demands on account of Ext.P1 order of assessment till a decision is taken on Ext.P4 stay petition by the fourth respondent.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department would point out that Ext.P4 appears to be filed before the Jurisdictional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). He submits that, with the introduction of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, the stay petition also ought to have been filed before the fourth respondent.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, would submit that, though Ext.P4 is addressed to the third respondent, the petition has actually been filed before the fourth respondent, as is evident from Ext.P5 acknowledgement. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the fourth respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to defer recovery of amounts for the assessed as due for the assessment year 2020-21, till a decision is taken by the fourth respondent Ext.P4 stay petition. Since the appeal has been filed beyond the statutory time limit, it is made clear that the fourth respondent needs to pass orders on merits on Ext.P4, only if he decides to condone the delay in filing Ext.P2 appeal. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P., JUDGE rkj