9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en orders issued by the Tax Recovery Officer under rule 26(1) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, by which the creditors of the petitioner have been restrained and prohibited from making payment of debts due and payable to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has to pay arrears of tax amounting to Rs. 97 lakhs together with interest under section 220(2) of the Income- t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore the court shows that on February 2, 2011, a communication was issued to the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner of Income- tax 1(2) in which the readiness of the petitioner to pay the outstanding demand in instalments of Rs. 10 lakhs per month was recorded. The petitioner was directed to produce evidence by the 16th of every month of the due payment of instalments failing which it was stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inclusive of interest has been paid and whereas for both the years in question, the total tax liability which has been paid amounts to 37.75 per cent. Hence, it is urged that there was no warrant for issuing garnishee notices to the customers of the petitioner, the effect of which would be to bring the business to a complete standstill. On the other hand, counsel appearing on behalf of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed orders are stayed conditional on the petitioner making a payment of Rs. 10 lakhs per month of the out- standing towards the liability to tax for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. This facility was granted to the petitioner which came to be with- drawn as a result of the default by the petitioner. The petitioner has shown its bona fides in paying a substantial amount as noted earlier. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
