8.4 Under the circumstances, for the reasons stated above, the impugned decision of the respondent No.2Assessing Officer rejecting the stay application cannot be sustained and the same deserves to be quashed and set-aside. So far as the decision of the respondent No. 1 is concerned, it appears that after the decision rendered by the respondent No. 2, the assessee filed stay application before the respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 1 has passed the impugned order mainly considering the order of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, first, the Assessing Officer is required to take appropriate decision on the stay application, as per the modified instruction dated 29th February 2016 and unless the case falls within Clause 4 B & (b), he is required to pass appropriate order on the stay application, granting stay on payment of 15% of the disputed demand. In case, the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the case falls within Clause 4 B or (b), in that case, he is required to follow the procedure as observed hereinabove; more particularly, Clause 4 [B] where the Assessing Officer is required to refer the matter to the administrative Principal CIT/CIT and thereafter, the Principal CIT/CIT to take appropriate decision.”
