9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner is before this Court challenging an order passed by the first respondent - the petitioner's Assessing officer on a petition filed by the petitioner for stay of demand of the arrears of income tax for the assessment year 2014-15. 3. The assessment for the said year was completed by order dated 26.12.2016 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the petitioner was assessed to tax for a total income of Rs. 3,71,05,196/-. Against the order of assessment, the petitioner filed an appeal before the third respondent - the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15 by appeal petition dated 25.1.2017. Apart from other things in the appeal petition, the first ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certain decisions, which they seek to rely upon. The first respondent, by the impugned order, stated that the petitioner did not make 20% payment as per circular No.1914 dated 31.7.2017 to consider their case for the grant of stay of balance demand and that they have not submitted any valid reason for not being able to pay the 20% of the arrears and the financials of the petitioner do not highlight any financial difficulty. 7. With regard to the case laws relied upon by the petitioner, the first respondent stated that those are all decisions rendered by Courts in writ cases and that this Court has not decided any substantial question of law. 8. The said observation with regard to the effect of decisions of the High Court as well as the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs that the first respondent has not gone into the aspect as to whether the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of interim order and this being a primordial requirement, failure to consider the said aspect would render the impugned order liable for interference. 11. Considering the contentions raised by the petitioner before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and taking note of the fact that hearing of the appeal has already commenced, there will be an order of interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order dated 04.9.2017 subject to the condition that the petitioner pays 15% of the income tax demanded i.e 15% of Rs. 1,58,18,050/-. It is stated that pursuant to the attachment of the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
