Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Dabur India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges tax demand orders. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's claims on tds applicability. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. respondent's acceptance of notice. (Para 5) |
| 4. court's view on deposit requirement. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. impugned order set aside, remand for fresh decision. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J.:
1. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging the order dated 26th October, 2022 dismissing the Petitioner's application for stay of demand and directing the Petitioner to pay 20% of the total outstanding demand by 10th November, 2022. Petitioner also seeks stay of the demands raised by virtue of the orders dated 4th August, 2021 and 8th September, 2020 passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 201/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [`the Act'] for Assessment Years [AY] 2013-14 to 2020-21 till the disposal of the appeals filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Respondent No. 2 passed orders dated 4th August, 2021 and 08th September, 2020 under Section 201/201(1A) of the Act holding that the Petitioner is an "assessee in default" on account of non-deduction of TDS under Section 194H of the
The requirement for 20% payment of a disputed tax demand for stay can be relaxed based on the circumstances of the case, as clarified by applicable legal precedents.
The requirement of payment of twenty percent of disputed tax demand is not a pre-requisite for putting in abeyance recovery of demand pending first appeal in all cases. The tax authorities are eligib....
Tax authorities must provide reasoned decisions considering principles like prima facie case and balance of convenience, and can relax mandatory deposit requirements in certain cases.
Tax authorities have discretion to grant stay on demand lesser than twenty percent, requiring consideration of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Mandatory payment of 20% of disputed tax under Section 201(1) can be relaxed based on case specifics, and non-reasoned administrative orders violate principles of procedural fairness.
It is open to tax authorities, on facts of individual cases, to grant stay against recovery of demand on deposit of a lesser amount than 20 per cent of disputed demand, pending disposal of appeal.
The court emphasized the relaxation of the requirement of payment of twenty percent of disputed tax demand in appropriate cases and the necessity for considering the prima facie case, balance of conv....
The requirement to deposit twenty percent of disputed tax demand for stay pending appeal is not absolute and can be relaxed based on case specifics.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
