JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Admittedly, appeal is pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax against the order of assessment. The main question involved in this case is as to whether due to non-deposit of tax with regard to the perquisites given by the company to its employees, action can be taken against the company in terms of amended Rule 3.
3. As the matter is pending before the appellate authority, it will not be proper for this court to express any opinion touching the merits of the case.
4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner confined this application only to the order rejecting the prayer for stay of the recovery of amount during the pendency of the appeals by the appellate authority. The said orders rejecting the stay in both the appeals have been annexed as annexure 10 series. According to the petitioner, in many of the cases the employees have either deposited the tax or if not deposited they are going to submit their revised returns and the validity of the amended rule is also under challenge before the Supreme Court.
5. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that it is a fit case where stay is to be granted in favour of the petitioner till the disposal of the appeals. Accordingly, recovery of the amount of tax is stayed till the disposal of the appeals by the appellate authority, provided the petitioner deposits 50 per cent, of the amount of tax assessed.
6. With the aforesaid direction this application stands disposed of.