DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Ramesth Constructions Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. refund sought for excess tax demand (Para 2) |
| 2. requirements for granting stay on tax recovery (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. order for refund within specified timeline (Para 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Matter has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking refund of Rs.1,66,35,954/- which was recovered in excess of 20% of the total disputed tax demand for the Assessment Year 2013-14 against the refunds due for various Assessment Years. Petitioner also seeks directions to the Respondents to hear and dispose of the appeal filed against the order dated 28th March, 2016 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short `the Act'].
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that under Section 220(6) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has been conferred with the power to grant stay on recovery of outstanding tax demand subject to fulfillment of appropriate conditions. He states that in order to provide guidance and lay down principles regarding stay of demand, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued various Circulars/Notifications from time to time including Office Memorandums dated 29th February, 2016 and 31st J
Tax authorities must adhere to established guidelines regarding tax recovery, including limiting recovery to 20% of disputed demands during appeal, failing which excess recovery is invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessing officer is mandated to grant stay on recovery of the balance disputed outstanding tax demand upon payment/recovery of the standa....
Tax authorities must follow established procedures when collecting disputed amounts, ensuring fairness and adherence to guidelines for stay of demands pending appeal decisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessing Officer must adhere to the provisions of the Office Memorandums and grant stay of demand till disposal of the first appeal on pa....
Tax authorities must adhere to their own prescribed procedures regarding refund adjustments, enforcing taxpayers' rights against undue excess recoveries.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessing officer is mandated to grant stay on recovery of the balance disputed outstanding tax demand till disposal of the first appeal o....
The Assessing Officer shall normally grant stay of demand till disposal of the first appeal on payment of 20% of the disputed demand, and the respondent is entitled to seek pre-deposit of only 20% of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessing Officer is entitled to seek pre-deposit of only 20% of the disputed demand during the pendency of the appeals in accordance with....
The court upheld that tax authorities must adhere to established guidelines on stay of demand, mandating refund of adjustments exceeding 20% of disputed tax during appeal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the assessing officer must grant stay of demand till disposal of the first appeal on payment of 20% of the disputed demand, unless specific re....
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.