BHOJA REDDY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both counsel at the stage of admission.

(2.) This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the second respondent not to take coercive steps for recovery of interest of Rs. 5,62,188 levied under s. 220(2) of the IT Act for the asst. yrs. 1988-89 and 1989-90 pending the disposal of R.C. No. 8 of 1994 on the file of this Court.

(3.) R.C. No. 8 of 1994 relates to the asst. yr. 1988-89. It is stated that a similar reference application is pending for the year 1989-90. As the reference Court has no inherent or incidental power to grant stay of recovery of tax or other dues, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is constrained to file this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court in CIT vs. Bansi Dhar and Sons (1986) 50 CTR (SC) 250 : (1986) 157 ITR 665 (SC) : TC 55R.783, held that the jurisdiction under s. 256 of the IT Act is advisory in nature and notwithstanding the reference, the appeal before the Tribunal must be deemed to be still pending and the Tribunal retains its jurisdiction to grant stay as part of its incidental or ancillary power. It was further observed that :