[2025:RJ-JP:6867-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3099/2022 Cholorochem Industries, E-57, Indraprasth Industrial Area, Ladpura, Kota 325005 Through Its Partner Shri Ajay Mittal ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota Having Its Office At Central Revenue Building, Rawat Bhata Road, Kota 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur Having Its Office At Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Siddharth Ranka, Adv. with Ms.Apeksha Bapna, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Siddharth Bapna, Adv. with Mr.Meyhul Mittal, Adv. & Mr.Rahul Kumar, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 17/02/2025 1. This petition is filed raising a grievance against the directions to deposit 20% of the demand created during pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (A). 2. The bird eye view of the facts are that a survey was conducted at the premises of the petitioner on 11.01.2018. The statement recorded during survey was reiterated on 25.01.2018. The proceedings culminated in assessment order dated 30.06.2021 creating a demand of Rs.2,18,05,696/-. [2025:RJ-JP:6867-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-3099/2022] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that petitioner has already deposited Rs.10 Lakh and shall deposit Rs.10 Lakh more within four weeks and the appellate authority be directed to dispose of the appeal expeditiously since the appeal is pending since 2021. It is further argued that the assessment was framed solely relying upon the statement which was reiterated. The contention is that assessment is without jurisdiction and is violative of Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the recorded statement is not statement on oath. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent defends the impugned order and submits that the petitioner was given a benefit of installment for depositing 20% of demand. 5. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and taking into consideration the issue involved and that the appeal is pending since 2021, this petition is disposed of with direction that in the eventuality of petitioner depositing Rs.10 Lakh within four weeks from today, the CIT shall decide the appeal on merits within three months thereafter. No coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner during pendency of the appeal before the CIT subject to deposit of Rs.10 Lakh within four weeks. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Himanshu Soni/39