Hussain Maideen Ebrahim Sha Vs ACIT (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that initiation of recovery proceedings based on ex-parte order passed without considering the submissions is unjustified. Accordingly, writ allowed and CIT(A) directed to dispose of appeal.
Facts- The petitioner is an individual assessee on the files of the respondent-Department. The petitioner’s case was selected for scrutiny and an assessment order was passed by the first respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vide order dated 08.04.2021, assessing the petitioner’s income at Rs.12,84,74,810/- and unexplained investment to the tune of Rs.11,77,00,000/-.
Against the said assessment, the petitioner preferred an Appeal before CIT(A), second respondent, and pending the Appeal, the petitioner filed a Petition for Stay before the first respondent. In the meantime, the petitioner, due to oversight, has failed to respond to the email proceedings of the second respondent, the second respondent passed an ex parte order on 06.03.2024. Challenging the said ex parte order, the petitioner preferred Appeal before ITAT and the matter was remanded back to second respondent.
Petitioner sent a letter dated 18.06.2024 to the first respondent along with the copy of the order passed by the ITAT and requested for stay of the demand and to lift the bank attachments and subsequently, filed a Petition for Stay, however, the first respondent, rejected the stay petition vide the impugned order dated 04.07.2024, and directed the petitioner to pay the purported mandatory 20% of the disputed demand. Challenging the said order dated 04.07.2024, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.
