9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjusted in excess of 20% of the disputed tax demands for the Assessment Year 2017-18 to the petitioner within four weeks. - W.P.(C) 1924/2022 - - - Dated:- 3-2-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA Petitioner Through : Mr. Vikram Kakar, Advocate. Respondents Through : Ms. Easha, Advocate. J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (ORAL) C.M.No.5517/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 1924/2022 C.M.No.5518/2022 1. The matter has been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking refund of ₹ 2,87,520/- which was recovered in excess of 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2017. He states that in violation of the provisions of the Office Memorandums, the respondents recovered the disputed outstanding tax demand in excess of 20% by way of adjustment of refunds due for subsequent assessment years. 5. He states that the petitioner had made a payment of ₹ 2,23,150/- (20% of ₹ 11,15,733/-) being 20% of the disputed amount for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 13th March, 2021 pursuant to the directions in the stay order dated 9th March, 2020 issued by the respondents. However, despite complying with the stay order, the respondents adjusted ₹ 2,87,520/- being 25% of the demand from the refunds due to the petitioner for the Assessment Years 2020-21 and 2021-22. 6. Issue notice. Ms.Easha, Advoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n excess of 20% of the outstanding demand should be recovered from the petitioner-assessee at this stage in accordance with paragraph 4(B) of the office memorandum dated 29th February, 2016. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the respondent is entitled to seek pre-deposit of only 20% of the disputed demand during the pendency of the appeal in accordance with paragraph 4(A) of the office memorandum dated 29th February, 2016, as amended by the office memorandum dated 25th August, 2017. 12. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the respondents are entitled to seek pre-deposit of only 20% of the disputed demand during the pendency of the appeals in accordance with paragraph 4(A) of the office memorandum dated 29th February ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
