9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1068X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs arising from a trial fell altogether in a different context. The observations made in the decision of the Supreme Court in the context of Civil and Criminal litigation cannot be made applicable in a Tax Appeal. An identical issue fell for the consideration of a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in the case of ORACLE FINANCIAL SERVICES SOFTWARE LTD, MUMBAI VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-13 (1) (1) ORS. [2019 (3) TMI 1320 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] , where it was held that power of the Assessing Officer to review the situation every six months, would not authorize him to lift the stay previously granted after full consideration and insist on full payment of tax without the assessee being responsible for delay in disposa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust, fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. We take notice of the fact that the Tax Appeal No. 1332/2014 preferred by the opponent assessee came tobe admitted by this court vide an order dated 19.12.2014. The order reads thus: Tax Appeal is Admitted for consideration of the following substantial questions of law: ( 1) Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law and in facts in not appreciating that the extended period of limitation was applicable? ( 2) Whether the findings of the Tribunal were not perverse inasmuch as the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellant had not taken rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to deposit. 2. In that view of the matter, there shall be stay against the recovery of penalty against the company/ partnership firm. However, we make it clear that the remaining portion of the duty and interest is not stayed for which the applicant is given time upto 30.03.2015 to deposit. 3. This Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. Rule, if any, is made absolute to the above extent. 4. Mr. Jaimin Gandhi, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue vehemently submitted that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT (203 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of stay is produced. 35. Thus, we declare the law to be that order framing charge is not purely an interlocutory order nor a final order. Jurisdiction of the High Court is not barred irrespective of the label of a petition, be it under Sections 397 or 482 Cr.P.C. or Article 227 of the Constitution. However, the said jurisdiction is to be exercised consistent with the legislative policy to ensure expeditious disposal of a trial without the same being in any manner hampered. Thus considered, the challenge to an order of charge should be entertained in a rarest of rare case only to correct a patent error of jurisdiction and not to re-appreciate the matter. Even where such challenge is entertained and stay is granted, the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above, more particularly, the observations made in paras 34 and 35 referred to above. The observations of the Supreme Court with regard to continuation of any interim order beyond the period of six months in any civil or criminal proceedings arising from a trial fell altogether in a different context. The observations made in the decision of the Supreme Court in the context of Civil and Criminal litigation cannot be made applicable in a Tax Appeal. An identical issue fell for the consideration of a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-13(1) (1) Ors. [Writ Petition No.542 of 2019] dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
