V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 12698 OF 2n?fi Between: M/s The Pedapadu Large Sized Cooperative Society Limited No.E864, Pedapadu Village, Pedapadu M^ridal, West Godavari District - 534 437, Andhra Pradesh. Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Damaraju Venkata Subbarao, S/o. Mr. D:V.Rangarao. ...Petitioner/s AND 1. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Eluru, Income Tax Office KKS Towers, RR Pet, Eluru - 534 002, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Center, New Delhi, Room' No 401, 2nd Floor Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 1.10 003. 3. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Telangana, IT Towers, 10-2-3, AC Guards, Masab Tank, 500 004, Telangana. 23-B-4-6/4, e-Assessment E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Pradesh and Hyderabad - A 4. The Joint Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Through the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (NaFAC), Delhi, North Block, New Delhi - 110 001. * 5. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Represented by its Chairman, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi - 110 001. ...Respondent/s Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated; in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, declaring the order of the Respondent or any other St 1 dated 29.03.2025 vide DIN and Letter No ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/105235909(1), in directing the Petitioner to pay 20 percent of the disputed demand, pending disposal of its the 1®* Appellate Authority, i.e appeal before the 4**^ Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2020 - 21, as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, bereft of valid reasons, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14,19(1 )(g) and 265 of the Constitution Sec. 148A of the Income Tax'^Atf ' 1961 any of India and and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2n?fi Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including any recovery, pursuant to the order of the r' Respondent, dated 29.03. vide DIN & Letter No.: ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/105235909(1), in directing the Petitioner to pay 20% of the disputed demand. 2025, pending disposal of its appeal before the 1« Appellate Authority, i.e., the 4"' Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2020 - 21, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.y.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VAMSI KRISHNA BODAPATI SRI ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVAdI, SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT The Court made the following: , REP. APHC010240042025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3526] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 12698 OF 2025 Between: M/s The Pedapadu Large Sized Cooperative Society...PETITIONER " NO.E864, Pedapadu Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District - 534437, Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Mr.Damaraju Venkata Subbarao, S/o Mr.D.V.Rangarao. AND Lir The Income Tax Officer and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: LAVA SIVA KARTIKEYA Counsel for the Respondent(S): ...RESPONDENT(S) 1. 2 This Court delivered the following ORDER: (per NJS,J) Heard Mr.A.V.A.Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.Vamsi Krishna Bodapati, learned Junior Standing Counsel representing Mr.Anup Koushik Karavadi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. / 2. The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “ to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, declaring the order passed by the 1^' Respondent, dated 29.03.2025, vide DIN .& Letter No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2024- 25/105235909(1), in directing the petitioner to pay 20% of the disputed demand, pending disposal of its appeal before the 7®' Appellate Authority, i.e., the 4'^ Respondent herein, for the Assessment Year 2020 i »• / i.« W 1 taw, bereft of any valid reasons, of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles ^ /, ao ai uiLt ai y, tiicycn I uau a 14,19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and Sec USA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and to consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice.” The learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions with reference to various legal contentions raised in the writ affidavit, submits that the 1®* respondent has passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He submits that the order passed by the respondent No.1 directing the petitioner to pay 20% of the disputed demand, yvithout considering the case of the petitioner, is not sustainable. He further states that the petitioner is not in a position to raise the demanded amount and if the Revenue is allowed to recover the amounts during the pendency of the appeal before the 1®* Appellate Authority, it would cause great hardship to the petitioner and all its activities would get hampered by financially crippling the Assessee. He also submits that in similar circumstances a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.12.2024 in Writ Petition No.27342 of 2024 was 3. pleased to dispose of the same with a direction to the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal within a period of six months and that during the ‘ pendency of the appeal, the Authorities shall not insist for the payment of j the instalments granted towards the outstanding amount. The learned counsel submits that in fact against the demands raised by the Assessing Authorities several writ petitions were filed and while entertaining the said writ petitions, interim orders were granted. 4. Whereas, the learned Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent Department submits that it is not the case of the writ petitioner that it is not capable of paying the 20% of the disputed demand and further that having availed the remedy of appeal, the writ petitioner is not justified in filing the writ petition. 5. [hough the learned counsel for the petitioner raised several legal contentions and it is also not in dispute that several writ petitions challenging the demands raised by the Assessing Authorities entertained, in the light of the orders passed in Writ Petition No.27342 of 2024, dated 31.12.2024, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition on similar lines. were 6. The respondent No.4-Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending disposal of the appeal, no action to collect the outstanding tax demand/installments shall be initiated and the liability of the petitioner, if any, shall be subject to decision of the Appellate Authority, in the appeal .on - merits, petitioner is at liberty to file additional the The material, if any, before the passing orders an opportunity of Appellate Authority and it is needless to state that before as indicated above, the petitioner shall be afforded hearing. 7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER / To, 1- The Income Tax Officer, Ward KKS Towers, RR Pet, Eluru 2. Assessment Unit, Income Center, New Delhi, Room 1, Eluru, Income Tax Office, 23-B-4-6/4 - 534 002, Andhra Pradesh. Tax Department, National e-Assessment Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 11 o 003. 3. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh 10-2-3. AC Guards, Masab T and Telangana, IT Towers, 500 004, Telangana. 4. The Joint Commissioner I ank, Hyderabad - (Appeals), the Commissioner Appeal Centre, Delhi of Income Tax (NaFAC), Delhi of Income Tax Through the North (Appeals), National Faceless Principal Chief Commissioher Block, New Delhi - 110 001! 5. The Central Board of Direct Taxes Department of Revenue, I Secretariat Buildings, New Delhi ’ Represented by its Chairman, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, - 110 001. 6. One CC to SRI. A V A SIVA KARTIKEYA 7. One CC to SRI. ANUP KOUSHIK FOR INCOME TAX Advocate [OPUC] KARAVADI, STANDING COUNSEL DEPARTMENT [OPUC] 8. Three CD Copies Sree (gsg) HIGH COURT DATED:07/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.12698 of 2025 ^ 2 4 SEP 2025 I O' 09 ^JvCiirrant DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS