9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d u/s 281B, there would have been no basis for forming a reason to believe that if the period of 30 days was to be observed u/s 220(1), that would be detrimental to the Revenue. The detriment to the Revenue must be akin to a situation where the demand of the Revenue is liable to be defeated by an abuse of process by the Assessee. Therefore, order of A.O. was not justified and was contrary to law. Petition is disposed off by directing continuation of provisional attachment u/s 281 B until disposal of appeal before CIT(Appeals). No coercive steps will be taken for recovery of demand pending the appeal – Decided in favor of assessee - WRIT PETITION (Lodging) NO.765 OF 2012 - - - Dated:- 26-3-2012 - DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD M.S.SANKLECHA, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 October 2011. The Commissioner of Income Tax has dismissed the application for stay and a communication has been issued to the Petitioner on 19 March 2012. It has been stated that the Petitioner has not been able to produce documents/ evidence to substantiate its claim as in the letter dated 15 March 2012. 3 The Petitioner challenges the rejection of the application for stay in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, who was instructed by the Assessing Officer present in the Court, states that the provisional attachment which was levied under Section 281B on 7 October 2011 covers mutual funds of a total value of Rs.36.54 Crores. That attachment whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... believe that it would be detrimental to the interests of the Revenue if a full period of 30 days is allowed. This exception has been structured by a further requirement of the previous approval of the Joint Commissioner. The exercise of the power to reduce the period under the proviso to Subsection (1) cannot be exercised casually and without due application of mind. The question as to whether it would be detrimental to the interests of the Revenue to allow the full period of 30 days has to be addressed. The Assessing Officer must, in the first instance, have reason to believe that the interests of the Revenue would be detrimentally affected by allowing a period of 30 days as stipulated in the statute. The Joint Commissioner whose approval ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tire demand by 16 March 2012. The action is highhanded and contrary to law. 7 The Revenue is adequately protected by the attachment which has been levied under Section 281B. Hence we dispose of the petition by directing that the provisional attachment under Section 281B shall continue to remain in force pending the disposal of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In order to enable the Assessee to adopt the remedy which may be available in law against the final order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), we also direct that the attachment shall continue to remain in force for a period of eight weeks after disposal of the appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On the aforesaid condition, no furthe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
