9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member And Shri N.K. Pradhan, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri F.B. Andhyarujina (AR) For the Respondent : Shri B.B. Rajendran (CIT-DR) ORDER PER PAWAN SINGH, J.M. 1. These four stay applications are filed by the assessee for seeking stay of outstanding tax demand for Rs. 46.73 Crore for Assessment Year 2013-14, Rs. 46.45 Crore for Assessment Year 2014-15, Rs. 47.91 Crore for Assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt (revenue) should not initiate coercive recoveries during the time provided by the statute to file the appeal. 3. The ld. AR submits that for Assessment Year 2010-11 and 2011-12, the appeal of the assessee has been heard and decided by Tribunal vide order dated 6th March 2019 in ITA No. 619 & 620/Mum/2019. The ld. AR further invited our attention that the order for Assessment Year 2010-11 & 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On the other hand the ld. DR for the revenue submits that huge demand of tax is due against the assessee. The assessee has not paid any amount against the outstanding demand. The order of lower authority is self-explanatory. The assessee has defaulted in deducting TDS under section 194C of the Act. 6. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties. The hearing in all related appeals in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
