TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rict Collector, Chittoor and others [ 2019 (3) TMI 1690 - SUPREME COURT] has succinctly laid down the principles of judicial review of administrative decisions. As held that this Court shall interfere with administrative decisions only on grounds of perversity, patent illegality and irrationality. That is when the error of law on the face of decision goes to the root of the decision, and this Court does not sit in appeal over such decisions. A reading of Ext. P8 order demonstrates that the second respondent has very cautiously and carefully considered the matter and has passed a reasoned order, without going into the merits of the appeal. Accordingly, the second respondent has directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the demand to stay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by directing the petitioner to deposit 15% of the demand to stay further recovery proceedings. The findings in Ext. P8 are self-contradictory and erroneous. The second respondent has failed to consider that the petitioner had fulfilled the trinity parameters laid down under the law. Therefore, Ext. P8 is arbitrary and illegal, warrants interference by this Court. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard Sri. Raja Kannan, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. Sri. Raja Kannan reiterated the contentions in the writ petition and placed reliance on the office memorandum dated 29.2.2016 promulgated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 7. It is later, on 22.7.2022 that the petitioner preferred Ext. P4 application, that too before the fourth respondent the Assessing Authority. The fourth respondent, after considering the application, passed Ext. P5 order staying the demand, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 20% of the demand. Not happy with Ext. P5 order, the petitioner preferred a review before the second respondent. The second respondent, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, has exercised his discretion and directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the demand. It is this discretionary power exercised by the second respondent, that the petitioner assails in the present writ petition. 8. The Hon ble Supreme Court has in a cat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
