IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 4005 of 2010 Between: The Agricultural Market Committee, Hyderabad, Rep. By its Selection Grade Secretary ..... PETITIONER AND The Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 5(1), Hyderabad and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not refunding an amount of Rs.2,32,25,880/- to the petitioner Market Committee, which was withdrawn vide debit advice as illegal and arbitrary and to consequently direct the respondents to refund the said sum pursuant to the orders dated 7.3.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.991/Hyd/2007, the present writ petition is filed. It is case of the petitioner that it is a Local Authority entitled to exemptions under Sec. 10(20) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner submitted returns under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2004-2005, whereupon the first respondent has passed an assessment order dated 29.12.2006 assessing the tax liability at Rs.2,32,25,880/-. Against this assessment order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, who confirmed the assessment by order dated 13.07.2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 991/Hyd/2007. The Tribunal, pending appeal, granted registration under Sec. 12-A of the Income Tax Act and, therefore, in view of granting registration, the Appellate Tribunal also set aside the order of assessment dated 29.12.2006 and remanded the matter to the first respondent for assessment afresh. It is also stated that during pendency of the appeal, the first respondent, pursuant to the Garnishee order, frozen the bank account of the petitioner and withdrew the assessed tax. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax. It is contended by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents that registration under Sec.12-A of the Act does not ipso fact entitles for exemption from payment of the tax. He further contends that pursuant to the order of the Tribunal, a notice under Sec. 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 1.12.2009 and 16.1.2009, requiring it to produce the books of accounts and the information relating to the assessment, which are yet to be produced by the assessee. In the facts and circumstances of the case, suffice it to direct the petitioner to produce the books of accounts and other relevant information, as required by the respondents for making assessment, within a period of two months from today, reserving liberty to it to raise all the objections before the concerned authorities and the respondents are directed to complete the assessment within a period of three months thereafter. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao April 26, 2010 CC within a week //BO// MAS