9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Principal Commissioner, has taken a view that, entire tax must be deposited. This would be wholly in violation of principle of natural justice. If the authorities were of the opinion that, the normal rule of stay upon depositing 20% of disputed tax demand, was not applicable in the present case, least that they had to do was to hear the Petitioner before taking final decision. The Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner's return of income for the Assessment Year 2016-17 came to be assessed by the Assessing Officer who passed order of assessment on 29th December, 2018, giving rise to tax demand of a sum of ₹ 10,35,03,417/(rounded of). (b) Petitioner filed an appeal against such order of assessment on 24th January, 2019. However, even before the appeal period was over, the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would deposit the further sum of ₹ 30 lakh latest by 25th March, 2019. 4. Learned Counsel Shri Suresh Kumar for the Department submitted that, looking to the peculiar facts of the case, the Assessing Officer had insisted on depositing the entire tax demand which was permissible as per the CBDT Circular. 5. In the present case, even before the Petitioner could request Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the Department latest by 25th March, 2019. This would be sufficient to cover 20% of the tax demand, taking into account amounts already recovered/ adjusted by the department; (iii) The Principal Commissioner shall dispose of Petitioner's stay application after hearing the Petitioner's authorized representative; (iiia) Till the final disposal of such stay application by the Pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
