3.The petitioner earlier approached the Assessment Officer and filed an application for grant of stay of the demand or in other words not to treat the petitioner as assessee in default. The Assessing Officer, by order dated 05.02.2018 following the Office Memorandum issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) dated 31.07.2017, directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the demand for grant of stay of the balance amount. The petitioner did not comply with the said order, but filed another stay petition before the Assessing Officer on 15.02.2018 for the same relief. By reply dated 23.02.2018, the Assessing Officer has stated that he does not have inherent power to review his earlier decision dated 05.02.2018, but pointed out that in terms of Office Memorandum dated 29.02.2016 in a case where stay of demand is granted by the Assessing Officer on payment of 15% of the disputed demand and the assessee is still aggrieved, he may approach the jurisdictional administrative Principal CIT/CIT for a review of the decision of the assessing officer. With the reply sent by the Assessing Officer, the petitioner approached the second respondent by way of a petition dated 28.02.2018 requesting for grant of stay. Unfortunately, the said application has been rejected by a single line order.
