IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 5647 of 2010 Between: M/s. Gujarat Andhra Road Carriers, Nizamabad, rep., by its partner Jasmer Singh Dhillon. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The income Tax Officer, Nizamabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 5647 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in issuing the notice dated 1.3.2010 in Form No.ITCP-25 under Rule 73 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct them not to take any coercive steps for recovery of the arrears pending disposal of the appeal before the 4th respondent. The case of the petitioner is that aggrieved by the assessment order dated 31.12.2008, it had preferred an appeal before the 4th respondent and the same is pending adjudication and it had also filed an application before the 3rd respondent seeking stay of collection of the tax pending disposal of the appeal, but the 3rd respondent granted stay subject to payment of 50% of the demand in installments at the rate of Rs.2,00,000/- p.m. Now, it is the case of the petitioner that it could pay only Rs.1,00,000/- p.m., and in this connection they made a representation to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent asked the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent. While so, the impugned notice was issued. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the 4th respondent and that the petitioner could pay Rs.1,00,000/- per month and therefore, on such condition, stay of further proceedings may be granted. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the appeal is pending before the 4th respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel it a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, there shall be stay of all further proceedings, pending disposal of the appeal before the 4th respondent subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) on or before 31st March, 2010. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Date: 11th March, 2010 Note: Operative portion by wire at party’s costs (BO) nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 5647 of 2010 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 03/03/2010