Asian Center for Organization Research and Development vs Deputy Director of Income Tax (E)

The Writ Petition is vehemently opposed by Ms. P.L. Bansal, learned Senior Standing Counsel, appearing for the revenue, on the ground that alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. According to the learned Counsel the assessee can still move the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) [in short ''DIT(E)''] for appropriate relief.

As in other cases, heard and decided by us, we note a threat in the letter dated 10-2-2009 to the effect that in case of non-compliance of the aforesaid instalment plan, the whole of the payment shall be recoverable without any further notice. The instalment plan is for an initial payment of Rs. 25 lakhs and a monthly payment of Rs. 20 lakhs thereafter.

We have perused Instruction No. 1914, dated 2-12-1993 as well as Instruction No. 96, dated 21-8-1969 issued by the CBDT. We find that even in Instruction No. 1914 the higher authority would have to consider exceptional circumstances such as unreasonably high-pitched assessment or where the assessment is likely to cause genuine hardship. We have also taken note of the stand of the revenue that the assessee can seek appropriate relief before the DIT(E). Keeping in mind the said circumstance at this stage, we refrain from making any further observations as we do not wish to impact the outcome either way. In view of the directions contained in the letter dated 10-2-2009, we permit the petitioner to file an application seeking stay before the DIT(E), within three days from today.

In view of the directions contained in the letter dated 10-2-2009, we direct that no coercive steps shall be taken for a period of two weeks after the disposal of the petitioner''s application for stay and/or the appeal, as may be appropriate.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.