Arun Excello Foundations Private Limited vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals - III)

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that it would sufficie if the second Respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioner, dated 19.01.2011, in respect of the demand made by the first Respondent, for the assessment year, 2008-09 and if the first Respondent is directed not to proceed against the Petitioner, in respect of the said demand, before the appeal is disposed of by the second Respondent. 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that the Petitioner may be directed to deposit 25% of the amount demanded by the first Respondent, before a direction is issued to the second Respondent, to dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioner.

In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the second Respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioner, dated 19.01.2011, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the first Respondent shall not proceed against the Petitioner till the final orders are passed in the said appeal, by the second Respondent. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.