Income Tax Demand judiciary-2

ITAT grants stay as appellant already paid 20% Tax Demand

Shubh Share Broking Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)

Assessee needs to seek stay of outstanding demand since his Bank account has been attached by the department. Also he has financial stringency. Attachments to bank accounts withdrawn to enable assessee to pay tax demand....

Read More

Withholding of refund against demand payable for earlier years justified

Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs ACIT (Supreme Court of India)

Uptill AY 2016-17, if a scrutiny notice u/s 143(2) is issued, the return is not required to be processed u/s 143(1) for grant of refund to the assessee however, from AY 2017-18 & onwards, a different regime is prescribed by Parliament by inserting  section 241-A which required separate recording of satisfaction on part of AO that having ...

Read More

Stay on recovery of demand cannot be rejected merely relying on CBDT instruction

M/s. Shriram Finance Vs Pr. CIT (Madras High Court)

Since CIT rejected assessee’s application for stay of recovery of demand merely relying of CBDT instruction which was cryptic and non-speaking as CBDT circular/instruction could not serve as a series of guidelines in the matter of grant of stay, therefore, the matter was remanded back to CIT for disposal afresh in accordance with law....

Read More

Non receipt of consideration is no ground for lifting pre-deposit requirement

Smt. Kalpana Ashwin Shah Vs ACIT and Ors. (Bombay High Court)

Smt. Kalpana Ashwin Shah Vs ACIT and Ors. (Bombay High Court) 1. The Petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax, requiring the Petitioner to deposit 20% of the disputed tax pending Appeal against the order of the assessment subject to which the remaining recovery [&hellip...

Read More

ITAT found conduct of AO in Tax Recovery case of pre-empting it from dealing with Stay application

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs. DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)

With this common order we will dispose of the captioned applications of the assessee seeking stay for the recovery of outstanding tax demand for assessment year 2009-10 & 2013-14 respectively. ...

Read More

No Interim Relief to Google: HC directs ITAT for expeditious disposal of appeal

Google India Private Limited Vs. DICT (Karnataka High Court)

In the circumstances, a direction is issued to the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal in an expeditious manner i.e., on or before 31/01/2018. It is needless to observe that in view of the specific direction issued by this Court for expeditious disposal of the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal, both parties are directed to co-operate with t...

Read More

Google Case: No stay on demand on the ground of Appeal Filing

M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (ITAT Bangalore)

M/s. Google India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) The present stay petition is filed seeking further extension of the stay of demand. Admittedly there is change of the circumstances from the first stay order, since this Tribunal had disposed of the appeal involving identical issue for earlier years against the assessee. Therefore, the ...

Read More

HC denied stay on collection of Tax on failure of appellant to pay tax which was suo motto agreed to be paid by appellant

Kalaignar TV Private Limited Vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Madras High Court)

This Court finds that when the petitioner had agreed to comply with the payment of disputed tax at the rate of Rs. 50 lakhs per month, they are bound to comply with such an undertaking. Now arguing before this Court pleading their financial incapacity or requesting this Court to examine the merits of the assessment is unsustainable, as th...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 221(1) for default in payment of demand cannot exceed tax amount

CIT Vs. Oryx Finance and Investment (P) Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

On reading the provisions of section 221 conjointly with the definition of “tax” as detailed under section 2(43), the irresistible conclusion that can be drawn is that the phraseology tax in arrears as envisaged in section 221 of the Act would not take within its realm the interest component. ...

Read More

Stay Application: No necessity to pre-deposit 15% of disputed demand

Jagdish Gandabhai Shah Vs principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Gujarat High Court)

High Court held that Considering the Office Memorandum F. No. 404/72/93- ITCC dated 29thFebruary 2016 as a whole, there is no such requirement of pre-deposit of 15% of the disputed demand either at the time of submitting stay application or before the stay application of the assessee is considered on merits. ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,719)
Company Law (7,655)
Custom Duty (8,709)
DGFT (4,622)
Excise Duty (4,526)
Fema / RBI (4,811)
Finance (5,179)
Income Tax (38,391)
SEBI (4,128)
Service Tax (3,776)

Search Posts by Date

September 2021