9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 115-O HELD THAT:- As in the interest of both the parties, is inclined to grant an order of interim stay, in the following terms: (i)The assessee shall make a payment of Rs. 1500 crores in cash or give a letter to the Bank to remit Rs. 1500 crores (Rupees One Thousand and Five Hundred Crores) to the credit of the respondent from the fixed deposits available, and furnish property security for the balance tax liability with interest and penalty, to the respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii)On such payment and deposit of title deeds pertaining to the property, the respondent shall release the lien on the remaining fixed deposits lying in the Banks. (iii)In the event of default on the part of the appellant in complying with the aforesaid conditions, this order shall stand vacated automatically, without any further reference to this court; and it is also open to the Revenue to recover the tax liability from the appellant in the manner known to law. (iv)The substantial questions of law raised herein shall be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal. (v)The memos filed by the respective parties, are taken on record. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nior counsel submitted that not only the tax amount of Rs. 3301 crores allegedly payable by the appellant / assessee, but also an amount of Rs. 1048 crores, is already in the safe custody of the Revenue, the details of which read as follows: (i)The appellant has already deposited Rs. 898 crores (which amounts to 27% of the alleged tax demand) (ii)As per the order of the learned Judge dated 03.04.2018, the appellant has paid a sum of Rs. 495 crores by way of cash to the respondent (which amounts to 15% of the alleged tax demand) (iii)An amount of Rs. 2956 crores stands deposited and invested in the form of fixed deposit receipts (which amounts to 86% of the alleged tax demand) with HDFC Bank Ltd and Bajaj Finance Ltd, on which the department has raised lien. Thus, Rs. 4349 crores is secured and collected by the Revenue as against the principal tax demand of Rs. 3301 crores; and Rs. 1048 crores in excess is also readily available with them. 5. Continuing further, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that when the appellant prayed for an order of stay against the order passed by the CIT(A) dated 03.03.2022, the Tribunal has directed the appellant to pay Rs. 475 crore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affirmed by the Tribunal, by the order impugned herein. 7. It is also submitted by the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent that the tax liability payable by the appellant is around Rs. 9403,09,59,478/- including interest u/s.220(2) and penalty u/s.271C of the Act. Except the payment of Rs. 495 crores, in compliance with the order of the learned Judge in WP.No.7354 of 2018 dated 03.04.2018, the appellant did not make any payment of tax till date. It is further submitted that the TDS deducted and remitted to the credit of the other entities can never be conceived as 'security' much less as available with the department and the same is contrary to legislative scheme contained in section 199 of the Act. That apart, the shareholders have offered income under the head capital gains in their respective returns of income for the AY 2017-18 and have absorbed the TDS credit towards their tax liability and the same have already been processed. That apart, the fixed deposit of Rs. 2956 crores would not be sufficient to meet the existing tax liability of Rs. 4358 crores and the corresponding interest liability of Rs. 1743 crores aggregating to Rs. 6101 crores; and as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in law in holding that buyback of shares not covered under section 77A of the Companies Act, 1956/ section 68 of the Companies Act, 2013 amounts to dividend under section 2(22)(a)/ 2(22) (d) of the Act? (vi)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Hon'ble Tribunal that the Scheme approved by the Hon'ble High Court is a colourable device intended to evade legitimate tax dues and lacks commercial purpose, not perverse, particularly when the Scheme was sanctioned by the Hon'ble High Court after considering the no objection report filed by the Central Government? (vii)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings of the Tribunal are perverse and contrary to facts and law? 10. Both the appellant and the Revenue made extensive arguments and also filed memos dated 15.11.2023 and 25.09.2023 respectively, in respect of the outstanding tax demand. According to the appellant, they have already paid a sum of Rs. 495 crores, besides a sum of Rs. 898.01 crores towards TDS remittance, available with the department. While so, the respondent has raised lien over the fixed deposi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
