9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst which no appeal was preferred by the Revenue, would demonstrate that the petitioner has a good prima facie case, thus the operation of the order dated 23.09.2016 is stayed, subject to deposit of 15% of the disputed tax, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - W.P.No.3093 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.3006 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2017 - Rajiv Shakdher, J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 10 B of the Act has been disallowed. 2.2. Record shows that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition pertains to the assessment year 2009-10. The petitioner, as it appears, had claimed exemption under Section 10 B of the Act as also a deduction under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, in its return filed vis-a-vis, the relevant assessment year. 2.3. The Assessing Officer, via, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled on the due date specified under Section 139(1) of the Act. According to respondent no.2, petitioner had filed its return beyond the due date specified in Section 139 (1) of the Act. Accordingly, respondent no.2 proceeded to disallow the exemption claimed by the petitioner under Section 10 B of the Act. 2.7. Against this order, which was passed on 23.09.2016, as indicated above, an appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that respondent no.2, instead, has summarily rejected the application for stay, and therefore, the petitioner has been constrained to move this Court. 4. Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, who appears for the respondents, does not dispute the facts set out above. The learned counsel also says that she cannot, but, submit that the Circular dated 29.02.2016 is binding on the Revenue. 5.Having regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
