NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner, Income-Tax – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner Income Tax, Bilaspur on 03.07.2023 in ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1054092576(1) for the assessment year 2018-2019 (Annexure P/4) by which the learned Assistant Commissioner has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for waiver of pre-deposit of 20% of assessed tax liability under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, however, granted installment facility to the petitioner to deposit Rs. 30,73,524/- per month which is payable before 15th of every month starting July, 2023 till March, 2024. The petitioner has also challenged the order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of the Income Tax (central), Bhopal dated 11.12.2023 in ITBA/RCV/F/17/2023-24/1058657759(1) whereby the application for stay of demand filed by the petitioner has been rejected and also granted reduced installment facility amounting to Rs. 13,85,000/- payable in 20 months till such installment reaches 20% of the total tax liability amounting to Rs. 13,84,43,552/- or till disposal of the appeal by CIT(Appeals) whichever is earlier.
Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU
B.M. Malani vs Commissioner of Income Tax {(2008) 10 SCC 617}
Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Dunlop India Limited {(1985) 1 SCC 260}
Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. vs. The ACIT and Others {(2017) 396 ITR 551}
Harish Chandra Bhati vs. PCIT {(2022) 447 ITR 585}
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 5 and Others vs L.G. Electronics {(2018) 18 SCC 447
Reliance Airport Developers vs Airport Authority of India {(2006) 10 SCC 1}
Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi & Ors
The court emphasized that the revenue authorities have the discretion to grant deposit orders of a lesser amount than 20% pending appeal, and the circulars issued by the department cannot overwrite t....
Assessments deemed excessively high must consider genuine hardship, allowing stays without mandatory pre-payment when necessary to protect taxpayer interests.
Assessment orders must provide adequate reasoning and consider potential hardship; failure renders them unsustainable, necessitating reevaluation by tax authorities.
Authorities must provide reasoned decisions when rejecting stay applications and consider claims of financial hardship, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice.
The Scheme of the Act provides that on passing of an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act, any sum is payable as tax, penalty or fine, then the Revenue would issues a notice of demand und....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.