Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 154 - HC - Income TaxStay petition - payment of 20% of the disputed demand - HELD THAT:- We find force in the contention of the petitioner that while passing Ext.P6 stay order, the first appellate authority was virtually acting under dictation, in that the first appellate authority felt compelled by the CBDT instructions relied upon in his order, to insist on a payment of 20% of the disputed demand, pending disposal of the appeal. When there was a specific direction in Ext.P5 judgment of this Court to the appellate authority to consider the stay application on merits, the appellate authority ought to have considered the stay application as directed by this Court, and without placing any reliance on the instructions issued by the CBDT directing the application to be decided in a particular way. It is obligatory on statutory authorities who are entrusted with quasi judicial powers under a statute, to adjudicate on issues without being bogged down by executive instructions that direct them to exercise their discretion in any particular manner. As a creature of the statute, on whom the discretionary power is conferred, the authority cannot abdicate his responsibilities by acting on the dictates of another who has no role to play under the statutory scheme. Also find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appellate authority did not hear him while passing Ext.P6 stay order, and that this was a further act in contravention of the directions of this Court in Ext.P5 judgment. Quash Ext.P6 order and direct the first appellate authority to pass fresh orders in the matter after hearing the petitioner, either through a physical hearing or through video conference.
|