AMIT SURESH BHATNAGAR Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the issue involved in all the three petitions is common, all the three petitions have been taken up for hearing together.

(2.) RULE in each of the petitions. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-authority in each of the petitions is directed to waive service of rule. By consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposal today.

(3.) EACH of the petitioner has challenged order dated 19-8-2008 made by respondent-authority under Section 179 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act ). Each of the petitioner is a Director of a Company,named, Diamond Project Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company ). For assessment year 2001-02, pursuant to assessment order dated 31-12-2006 demand of Rs. 3,62,01,913/- was raised in hands of the Company. The appeal filed by the Company before Commissioner (Appeals) came to be dismissed vide order dated 31-3-2008. The Company has preferred Second Appeal before the Tribunal and the said Appeal bearing No. ITA-1536/ahd/2008 is pending as of today. It appears that the respondent-authority called upon the Company to make payment during pendency of the First Appeal for liquidating a part of the demand and correspondence ensued between the respondent-authority and the Company. Ultimately, on 8-8-2008 the Company wrote to the respondent-authority pointing out that a sum of Rs. 15,09,946/- had been paid and the company was also making payment of Rs. 1 lac every month. The Company,therefore, requested for further stay against recovery of demand till the disposal of the appeal pending before Tribunal. On 1-9-2008 the request for stay was rejected. The impugned order has been made on 19-8-2008. In the impugned order, the demand that has been shown to be outstanding vis-a-vis the Company is at a figure of 3,48,95,985/- considering the interest on the outstanding dues.