- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 14084 OF 2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN: N.T. RAHAMATHULLA KHAN ASSOCIATES REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SRI B.R.ZAKIR AHMED KHAN, S/O LATE SRI B.RAHAMATHULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT:, NO.13/11, PAMPAMAHAKAVI ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU – 560 004 KARNATAKA, INDIA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU - 5 ROOM NO.538, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5(2)(1), ROOM NO.316, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO -ISSUE DIRECTION TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF STAY DATED 15.03.2019 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BENGALURU IN F.NO.NTRKA/STAY/PR.CIT-5/BNG2018-19 REFERRED TO AS ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO NOT TO RECOVER THE DISPUTED DEMAND A SUM OF RS.15,67,23,332/- FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers: “a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or direction to modify the order of stay dated 15.03.2019 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru in F.No.NTRKA / stay / Pr.CIT-5 / BNG2018-19 referred to as Annexure - A. b) Direct the respondents to not to recover the disputed demand a sum of Rs. 15,67,23,332/- for the impugned assessment year 2016-17. c) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Sri Annamalai S, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri Y V Raviraj, learned counsel appearing for respondents. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the impugned action and the appeal is pending adjudication. The petitioner is before this Court on a coercive action sought to be initiated, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 notwithstanding pendency of the appeal, by ordering recovery. He would submit that the coordinate bench of this Court has passed protective orders granting stay of the impugned action and would submit that the issue in the lis is identical. 4. The coordinate bench, in identical circumstances, in W.P.No.21022 of 2019, by its order dated 24-05-2023, has held as follows: “…. …. …. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order at Annexure-A passed on the application for stay is a cryptic order with no application of mind. It is submitted that in terms of the detailed request made out in the reply at Annexure-F, the Authority ought to have applied its mind and exercised discretion appropriately. It is submitted that the very contention raised has been decided in favour of the assessee in certain proceedings with respect to the assessment year 2016-17 in light of exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity). It is submitted that there is no notice prior to denying exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act which though uploaded in the portal was not intimated to the assessee. 3. It is further submitted that while considering grant of stay, financial hardship was required to be considered and there is no application of mind while passing impugned order. It is pointed that details have been setout in their application regarding prima-facie case in their favour. It is submitted that the appeal is pending since January-2019 and at this stage, the question of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 passing order directing Authority to reconsider and pass fresh orders on application of stay would be futile exercise and in fact, Authority must be directed to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in the light of the merits as made out in the application for stay, there may be direction to the Authority not to take any precipitative steps till conclusion of the appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue would submit that at the most, the order at Annexure-A requires to be set aside and matter be remanded for consideration in accordance with the applicable requirements. 5. Noticing that the appeal is of the year 2019 and also the order at Annexure-A is cryptic order assigning absolutely no reasons, it would meet the ends of justice while taking note of the contentions raised on stay application, that the Authority is directed not to take any precipitative steps for recovery of demand till the disposal of the appeal pending before the First Appellate Authority. It is needless to state that the Authority may expedite the hearing of the appeal. Accordingly, petition is disposed off and the order at Annexure-A dated 23.04.2019 is set aside subject to the observations made above.” 5. Learned counsel Sri Y V Raviraj appearing for respondents would not dispute the position, as is considered by the coordinate bench and would submit that the issue is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 6. In that light, this petition stands disposed, in the same terms and granting the same relief, as is granted by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34942 WP No. 14084 of 2019 coordinate bench in the order quoted supra. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34