Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2013 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 199 - HC - Income TaxStay of recovery - Addition in total income - Increase in G.P. rate - Held that:- unlike the cases under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, a strong prima facie case is not the indicator nor would be a motivating factor or consideration in exercising the discretion under Section 220 (6) of the Act. - It is a different matter where the assessing officer ignores the settled principle of law or a binding decision of the Court, the guiding principles for excercising discretion for holding that the assessee is not in default, if he deposits part of the amount is, where the assessment order appears to be unreasonably high-pitched or where genuine hardship is likely to be caused to the assessee. Assessment is only two and half times higher than the returned income, we find that the exercise of discretion in favour of petitioner in directing him to deposit only 50% of the demand and that too in instalments is reasonable. The Assessing Officer has also found that as regards financial status the assessee has shown surplus of Rs.76,63,51,112/-, Sundry Creditors at Rs.14,30,40,673/- and cash and Bank balance at Rs.1,52,07,130/- in the return of income which shows that the financial health of the assessee is very much sound. The Assessing Officer has granted substantial relief to the petitioner - Following decision of Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2009 (2) TMI 410 - DELHI HIGH COURT], B.M. Malani v. Commissioner of Income Tax and another [2008 (10) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] - Decided in favour of Revenue.
|