9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he demand was Rs.40.54 lakhs stay on the recovery of balance until the disposal of the appeal before the CIT (Appeals) - we direct that the CIT (Appeals) shall expedite the disposal of the appeal and endeavour to do so within a period of three months from order date -make the rule absolute by modifying the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax by staying the recovery of the balance amount of Rs.40.54 lakhs pending disposal of the appeal. - WRIT PETITION NO.653 OF 2012 - - - Dated:- 15-3-2012 - DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. Mr.Firoz Andhyarujina, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sameer G.Dalal and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan for the Petitioner. Mr.Suresh Kumar with Ms.Suchitra Kamble for the Respondents. Rule, by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncial status and affairs of the Petitioner the payment of such an amount is not likely to cause any financial hardship. Simultaneously, on 27 February 2012 an order has been passed by the Assessing Officer, adjusting the refund of Rs.78 lakhs against the demand of Rs.1.18 crores. Consequently, the Petitioner has been called upon to pay an amount of Rs.40.54 lakhs by 10 March 2012. 3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the CIT (Appeals) has failed to take due note of the submission which has been made regarding the additions made. It has been stated that primarily the additions have been made by the Assessing Officer on three counts: (i) Interest paid to HDFC Bank; (ii) The annual letting value of house property; a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , but equally as quasi judicial authorities, they owe a duty of fairness to the assessee. This seems to be lost sight of in the manner in which the authority has acted in the present case. The parameters for the exercise of the jurisdiction to grant a stay of demand has been set out in several judgments of this Court, including in KEC International vs. B.R.Balakrishnan.251 ITR 158 In the present case, the assessee returned an income of approximately Rs.19 crores. In the original order of assessment, there was a demand of Rs.2 crores, which was scaled down upon rectification to Rs.1.30 crores initially and thereafter, to Rs.1.18 crores. The assessee in the present case is a professional. The submissions which have been made on behalf of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
