Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 1285 - HC - Income TaxStay of demand - recovery proceedings - scope and ambit of enabling provision namely Section 220(6) - petitioner apart from other reliefs also prayed for not insisting to take 20% of the demand and grant complete stay without any deposit - Respondent No.3 rejected the prayer of petitioner and directed him to deposit 20% of disputed demand - HELD THAT:- Respondent No.3 has not taken pains to deal with the factual backdrop, the relevant statutory provision and the judgments cited by the petitioner in support of his contention in the said application (Annexure P/4). While reaching to a 'conclusion', the respondent No.3 has not assigned any 'reason' as to why stand taken by the petitioner was not treated to be trustworthy by the respondent No.3. The reasons are held to be heart beat of conclusions. In absence of reasons, conclusion cannot sustain judicial scrutiny. Apex Court in the case of M/s. Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd and another Vs. Masood Ahmed Khan and others [2010 (9) TMI 886 - SUPREME COURT] emphasized the need of assigning reasons in administrative, quasi-judicial and judicial function/order. Thus it is be clear that the impugned order is devoid of any reason. Thus, it deserves to be jettisoned. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03.01.2023 is set aside. The matter is restored in the file of respondent No.3 at the stage of consideration of application (Annexure P/4). Since that order was passed because of non-payment of disputed amount of 20% and this Court while setting aside the impugned order dated 03.01.2023 is kind enough in remanding the matter for fresh consideration, the said attachment order may also be stayed till fresh decision.
|