The Commissioner rejected the petition  on the grounds that though the Tribunal had deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of interest earned from fixed deposit by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16 the Department had not accepted the decision of the Tribunal and had filed an appeal before the High Court and that various courts had held that interest earned under similar circumstances and facts to be of revenue in nature and liable to tax. On a writ petition the Court held, that unless there was a stay by a competent court of the operation of the order of the Tribunal, the Principal Commissioner should give effect to the order and pass an order in accordance with law. The order of the Tribunal or the operation of the order had not been suspended by any court. The Principal Commissioner should grant a personal hearing to the assessee and provide an opportunity to rely on or distinguish any judgments or order passed by any court or Tribunal and consider the assessee’s submissions in the assessment order. The order rejecting the assessee’s petition under section 264 read with section 260 was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration. Matter remanded. referred  UOI v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. [1992] Supp (1) SCC 443  (AY.2012-13 to 2015-16)