Law:

Section:

JUDGMENT Jayant Patel, J. - Rule. Mr. Nitin Mehta, learned counsel appears for respondents no.1 to 3 and waives notice. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard. 2. The only question arise for consideration in the present matter is "Whether the order below the stay application could be passed by respondent no.2 without recording any reasons or not?" 3. The relevant facts show that after the AO passed the order of assessment and made the demand of tax of Rs.2,07,55,490/- for the assessment year 2011-2012, the petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) contending inter alia that it was only a typographical error for claiming the benefit under section 10A, though wrongly typed as 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the "Act"). It is also not in dispute that the petitioner preferred stay application. However, below stay application, vide order dated 25.08.2014 (Annexure D), the said stay application has been initially granted on the condition to furnish the bank guarantee, but subsequently, as the bank guarantee was not furnished, the application is dismissed. Under the circumstances, the present petition before this Court. 4. We have heard Mr. Soparkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Nitin Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. The perusal of the order dated 28.07.2014 as well as order dated 25.08.2014 shows that when the application for stay came to be decided for the first time, vide order dated 28.07.2014, the reasons are not mentioned for prima facie consideration of the merit or even on the aspect of balance of convenience. Nothing is recorded in the order as to why the ground of bank guarantee for grant of stay is taken into consideration. In our considered view, the order can be said to be non-speaking order since no reasons are mentioned. We may also record that the department has issued Circular No.1914 dated 02.12.1993 for the procedure to be followed while considering the matter for grant of stay application. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent revenue has not been able…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492