9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1071X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lected tax. The first appellate authorities then cannot go beyond the 20% as indicated in the proviso - the appellate authorities would consider the stay petitions in accordance with the proviso and the directions hereinabove, and pass orders within a period of two months, in which period the recovery proceedings would be kept in abeyance - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - W.P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere the assessees have paid 20% of the tax. This is introduced to reduce litigations and also to ease the burden of the first appellate authorities. The assessees could avail of the said proviso is the contention. 3. It is also the contention of the learned Government Pleader that such option has to be exercised by the petitioner at the time of filing an appeal and not later. The petitioners ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g such deposit to be made before the filing of the appeal. At any point, the assessee could exercise the option. 5. In that context, it is pertinent that, by the introduction of the proviso, the prima facie consideration which is required, insofar as a stay application in a first appeal also assumes a slightly different colour. Earlier when an assessment order was passed on best judgment, then ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the matter, prima facie to decide upon whether any further reduction has to be granted from the 20% of the disputed amount of tax, as has been provided in the statute. If not mitigation is warranted then, the first appellate authority would be perfectly justified in directing deposit of 20% tax demanded, failing which the assessee would be liable to be proceeded against for recovery. 7. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
