Appeal before CIT(A) – Power to grant stay of recovery – Section 220(6) – A. Y. 2011-12: During pendency of appeal before him the CIT(A) has inherent jurisdiction to grant stay of recovery:

During the pendency of appeal before the CIT(A) for the A. Y. 2011-12, the assessee made application before the CIT(A) for stay of recovery proceedings against an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 220(6). The CIT(A) dismissed the application holding that though he had inherent power to consider the stay application, it would not be considered for administrative reasons which according to him, madated avoidance of multiple stay application before different authorities.

The Bombay High Court allowed the assessee’s writ petition and held as under:

“i) The jurisdiction of the CIT(A) to deal with applications for stay of the order in appeal before him is inherent as an appellate authority. This jurisdiction is to be exercised on examining the order in appeal. As against this, the jurisdiction with the Assessing Officer of staying the demand u/s. 220(6), and that of the Commissioner to stay the demand, are on different considerations, i.e., including other factors over and above the order.

ii) The Assessing Officer and the Commissioner do not stay the order in appeal but only stay the demand issued consequent to the order which is in appeal. This is only to ensure that the assessee is not deemed to be an assessee in default.

iii) The jurisdiction of the CIT (A) as an appellate authority ought not to be confused with that of either the Assessing Officer u/s. 220(6) of the Act or of the Commissioner in his administrative capacity.

iv) The CIT(A) was directed to dispose of the stay application as expeditiously as possible. In the mean time, the Revenue was not to adopt coercive proceedings against the assesee till the disposal of the stay application by the CIT(A).”