UPPU KARUNASESH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Counsels appearing for the Respondents.

(2.) The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that the assessing authority had passed the assessment order, dated 15.12.2010, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. He had also submitted that no proper reasons had been given by the assessing authority, before the assessment order had been passed. Therefore, the Petitioner had preferred an appeal, challenging the said assessment order before the first Respondent, in I.T.A. No. 561 of 2010-2011. The Petitioner had also filed a stay petition before the first Respondent, along with the said appeal. However, the first Respondent had passed a conditional order of stay, on 01.03.2011, under Section 220, Clause 6 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, asking the Petitioner to pay Rs. 13,46,286/-, which is 50% of the amount of tax and interest demanded from the Petitioner, on or before 15.03.2011. In such circumstances, the Petitioner had filed the present writ petition before this Court, under Section 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that an assessment order had been passed against the Petitioner under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax, 1961, determining the total income of the Petitioner as Rs. 1,94,75,590/-, and raising a demand of Rs. 26,92,572/-, payable by the Petitioner. He had also submitted that sufficient opportunity had been given to the Petitioner before the assessment order had been passed.