What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the impugned order due to the absence of reasons. The Appellate Authority was directed to dispose of the petitioner's interim stay application within four weeks, following specific guidelines.

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Officer. The High Court noted that the impugned order lacked reasons. The petitioner requested the Appellate Authority to dispose of their interim stay application.

What were the issues?

Whether the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Officer was valid without assigning reasons. Whether the Appellate Authority should consider the interim stay application in light of given guidelines.

M/S. Lokopayogi Ilakhe and… vs ITO | Karnataka High Court 2012

WP No.66391/2012 : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH Writ Petition No.66391/2012 (T-IT) Between: M/s. Lokopayogi Ilakhe and Karnataka Nawakar Pattin Sanga Niyamit, Fort Road, Belgaum. Represented by its Secretary, Bharmappa Mallappa Durgappagal. …Petitioner (By Sri. Sangram S.Kulkarni, Advocate) A n d : 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Belgaum. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Belgaum. 3. The Income Tax Department, Represented by the Chief Secretary, Ministry of Finance North Block, New Delhi. …Respondents (By Sri. Y.V.Raviraj, Advocate) This petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order passed at Annexure-D passed by respondent No.1 dated 13.08.2012 and etc.

WP No.66391/2012 : 2 : This petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following: ORDER H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): Shri. Y.V.Raviraj, learned standing counsel is directed to take notice for the respondents. 2. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard on merits and is being disposed of by this order. 3. As could be seen from the impugned order dated 13.08.2012 (Annexure-D), no reasons are assigned for the order. Accordingly, the order is set aside. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the writ petition may be disposed of by directing the Appellate Authority i.e., respondent No.2 herein to dispose of the application filed by the

WP No.66391/2012 : 3 : petitioner for interim stay, before the Appellate Authority on 15.06.2012, in the light of the guidelines given by the Bombay High Court in UTI Mutual Fund v. Income Tax Officer, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-E. The Appellate Authority is, accordingly, directed to dispose of the application for interim stay in the light of the guidelines stated in the judgment at Annexure-E referred to above, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Petition disposed of. SD/- JUDGE Kms

M/S. LOKOPAYOGI ILAKHE AND KARNATAKA NAWAKAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments