9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the assessment year 2008-09. The words, "future period" in the order of the Supreme Court would denote any tax liability that would arise or accrue after the date of the order passed by the Supreme Court, i.e., after 18th of January, 2012. - even if any assessment order is passed after 18th of January, 2012 but relates to any assessment year prior to 18th of January, 2012 would come under the category requiring the accrued tax liability/arrears to be paid up to 50% and the balance 50% by way of bank guarantee. The words "future period" would include such demand for the period subsequent to 18th of January, 2012. The impugned demand notice requiring the petitioner to pay further amount towards the interest compound is patently misconceive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt staying the operation of the judgement of the High Court subject to the condition that the petitioner would deposit 50% of the accrued tax liability/arrears under the Act of 2007 and furnish bank guarantee for the balance amount. The petitioner was also required to deposit 50% of the tax liability/arrears including interest and penalty and furnish bank guarantee for the balance amount as and when a demand notice was issued under the U.P. Act of 2007 for the past period. The petitioner was also directed to pay the tax at the prevailing rates for the future period. For facility, the interim order of the Supreme Court dated 18th of January, 2012 is extracted hereunder: "Upon hearing counsel the Court made the following ORDER SLP (C) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed to keep the bank guarantee(s) alive during the pendency of these appeals. The amount(s) so deposited/paid and the bank guarantee(s) furnished is subject to the result of the appeals. The appellants shall also deposit 50% of the tax liability/arrears, including interest and penalty, and furnish guarantee for the balance amount as and when demand notices are issued under the U.P. Act, 2007 for the past period. In default, the interim order(s) granted by this Court shall automatically stands vacated. In case the State of Uttar Pradesh loses the matters at the time of final hearing, it shall refund to the appellants the amount deposited with interest at the rate which may be fixed by this Court. It is also made clear that in case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e interim order, the High Court had also passed an interim order directing the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee, which they did. Upon dismissal of the writ petition on 23rd of December, 2011, the respondents enchashed the bank guarantee on 31st of December, 2011. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, a sum of ₹ 4.46 crores was furnished as bank guarantee, which was enchased. For the assessment year 2008-09, the liability of entry tax imposed upon the petitioner was ₹ 4,63,92,299/-. The interest imposed was ₹ 2,27,12, 897/- Total tax liability including the interest worked out to ₹ 6,91,05,196/- As per the order of the Supreme Court, 50% of the tax liability/arrears including interest and penalty was required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded was for the assessment year 2008-09. The words, "future period" in the order of the Supreme Court would denote any tax liability that would arise or accrue after the date of the order passed by the Supreme Court, i.e., after 18th of January, 2012. We also make it clear that even if any assessment order is passed after 18th of January, 2012 but relates to any assessment year prior to 18th of January, 2012 would come under the category requiring the accrued tax liability/arrears to be paid up to 50% and the balance 50% by way of bank guarantee. The words "future period" would include such demand for the period subsequent to 18th of January, 2012. In the light of the aforesaid interpretation, we find that in the insta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
