Anand Palanisami vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

M. Duraiswamy, J.—1. Writ Petition Nos. 4460 to 4462 of 2016 have been filed by the petitioner to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in PAN. No. AFJPA4713N and to quash the impugned order in C.No. 2802/C-2/2015-16/2, dated 29.1.2016 passed by the second respondent rejecting the stay petition for the assessment years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 and direct the second respondent to grant stay of demand pending disposal of the appeal before the third respondent.

Similarly, Writ Petition Nos. 4905 to 4910 of 2016 have been filed by the petitioner to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in PAN. No. AKFPV0020L and to quash the impugned order in C.No. 2802/C-2/2015-16/1, dated 29.1.2016 passed by the second respondent rejecting the stay petition for the assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 and direct the second respondent to grant stay of demand pending disposal of the appeal before the third respondent.

After making elaborate submissions, Mr.R.Sivaraman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the respondents had already attached the immovable properties belonging to the petitioners and therefore, the respondents may be directed to complete the adjudication, within a time frame.

Mr. Pramod Kumar Chopda, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the third respondent may require a year''s time for completing the adjudication for the reason that the third respondent has to peruse the entire documents produced by the petitioners.

However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that a shorter time may be fixed for completing the adjudication for the reason that the petitioners are put to hardship, since their properties were attached by the respondents.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the third respondent to complete the adjudication, within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to say that the petitioners should co-operate with the third respondent for completing the adjudication within the time stipulated by this court.

With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.