TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is also a matter of record and as per the case of the respondents themselves, a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- has been paid by the assessee against the said demand and a sum of Rs.44,86,414/- had also been collected. Under Section 220(6) where an appeal was pending against the assessment order, the assessee was not to be treated as an assessee in default in respect of the amount in dispute in appeal, in the discretion of the Assessing Officer on such conditions as he may think fit to impose. The Assessing Officer is, thus, required to pass a reasoned speaking order. As in the present case order passed by respondent no. 2 cannot be termed to be a speaking order in consonance with the requirements of Section 220(6), therefore the attachment ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cluding interest under Section 234B/C of the Act of Rs.1,69,09,583/- was raised on 28.12.2011 by respondent no. 2. A payment of Rs.25,00,000 had been made by the petitioner-assessee and Rs.13,94,366/- and Rs.30,92,048/- had been taken away by the respondents by way of attachment of different bank accounts of the petitioner resulting in payment of approximately 41.31% of tax demand. The petitioner had also deposited advance tax to the tune of Rs.44,84,986/- resulting in payment of approximately 67.83% of demand. The additions made in the assessment order were essentially on account of disallowance under Section 10B for Rs.3,62,19,000/- and disallowance under Section 14A of Rs.6,84,495/- of the Act. The said additions had been contested by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice under Section 226(3) of the Act to the petitioner's bankers for attachment of various bank accounts without informing the petitioner and the petitioner was informed by its banker telephonically and by E-mail dated 18.10.2012 regarding the attachment of the bank accounts. After getting the said information, the petitioner had submitted a representation on 18.10.2012 before respondent no. 2 and the CIT(A), Commissioner of Income Tax-respondent no. 1, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on 19.10.2012 and 22.10.2012. Vide attachment order dated 17.10.2012 the rent and security deposits and interest thereon were attached. Accordingly, the writ petition was filed. 3. In the written statement f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s pending with the Appellate Authorities. Copy of the order sheets and the recovery proceedings were attached. There was no evidence to show that the financial position of the assessee was weak and after having considered the submissions and having allowed assessee sufficient time and opportunity, the application for stay was rejected as per order sheet. No stay order had been received from the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-II, Gurgaon or the Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad. The instructions of the Board had been duly followed while passing an order under Section 226(3) of the Act. The demand could not be termed as high pitched as pleaded by the assessee, which he had failed to substantiate. The banks accounts stood releas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the stay application of the petitioner had been rightly rejected by respondent no. 2. 5. From the facts of the present case, as noticed hereinbefore, it transpires that the petitioner's appeal against order dated 28.12.2011 under Section 246 of the Act is pending before the Appellate Authority. Against the declared income of Rs.1,30,09,970/-, the Assessing Officer has assessed the income at Rs.4,99,13,470/- and also charged interest etc. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 220(6) of the Act before the Assessing Officer requesting that the entire demand was disputed in the appeal and since it was the first appeal, the demand may be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. It is also a matter of record and as per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so failed to furnish any evidence to show that the financial position of the assessee is weak. Hearing fixed for 8-10-2012 at 11.00 AM. Present Sh. Rajesh Mahna, Advocate and requested for stay of demand. The assesses has not submitted any plan to deposit o/s demand. 'A' is directed to deposit the o/s demand stay application of the 'A' is rejected. Sd/- 08/10/12 7. Under Section 220(6) of the Act, where an appeal was pending against the assessment order, the assessee was not to be treated as an assessee in default in respect of the amount in dispute in appeal, in the discretion of the Assessing Officer on such conditions as he may think fit to impose. The Assessing Officer is, thus, required to pass a reasoned speaking order. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
