GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (3) TMI 890 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2015 (3) TMI 890 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - TMI - Stay against attachment of six bank accounts appropriating the amounts therefrom for its payments of the penalty levied rejected - petitioner is a Government of Haryana undertaking - refusal of exemption under Section 10(23C)(iv) - The tax dues have already been paid. In addition thereto, pursuant to the attachment of the accounts, an amount of about ₹ 11.27 crores has already been appropriated by the respondents-Department against a d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

und of the amount of about ₹ 11.27 crores, at this stage. The same must await the decision of the appeal before the CIT(Appeals). Considering the fact that the petitioner is a statutory Corporation and receives grants also from the Central Government, it would be proper that no coercive action is taken against the demand of penalty till the decision of the appeal before the CIT (Appeals). - stay granted - CWP No. 23497 of 2014 - Dated:- 9-3-2015 - S. J. Vazifdar, ACJ And G. S. Sandhawalia, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate Government. The same are used for the purpose of discharging its statutory functions and duties. The respondents contend that the petitioner had not obtained exemption under Section 10(23C)(iv) and registration under Section 12AA of the Act and as a result thereof, they are not entitled to the exemption that they are claiming. There are proceedings, therefore, pending in respect of the refusal of exemption under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act. In the event of the petitioner succeeding in tho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the respondents-Department against a demand of ₹ 51 crores towards interest. The petitioner had, thereafter, filed an application for stay on 10.11.2014 before the CIT (Appeals). The same was rejected on the very same date, without affording the petitioner a hearing. On the same day, the Banks were called upon to pay the amount lying to the credit of the petitioner with the respondents. Thus, the petitioner's stay application has not been appropriately considered. The only ground on w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version