1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1045 OF 2010 Rajan B. Datar ..Petitioner. V/s. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Mr. Chirag Balsara with Ms. S.S.Deshpande and R.P. Jain i/b. RES Legal for petitioner. Mr. Vimal Gupta; for respondents. CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2010 P.C. :- 1. Rule, by consent made returnable forthwith. Counsel for the respondents waives service. With the consent of counsel, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. By an order dated 2nd February, 2010 passed under section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, Nasik has declined to grant a stay on the application made by the petitioner. Ex-facie, the order does not contain any reason why the stay was declined. No hearing was furnished to the petitioner. This Court in the judgment in KEC International Ltd. V/s. B.R. Balkrishnan and others1 has 1 251 ITR 158 2 laid down the guidelines to be observed in this regard. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 2nd February, 2010 and direct the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II, Nasik to pass a fresh order, in according with law, after giving to the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Until the application for stay is disposed of, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner and in the event of stay being refused, status quo shall be maintained for a period of one week from the date of communication of the order to enable the petitioner to pursue such remedy as may be available in law. No other prayer has been pressed at the hearing. We clarify that we have had no occasion to deal with the rival contentions on merits. 3. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)