9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DGMENT 1. The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the condition imposed by the appellate authority, while passing Exts. P5/P5(a) orders dated 25.07.14 and 28.08.14 respectively, directing the petitioner to satisfy 30 % of the assessment amount and 35 % of the penalty amount, so as to avail the benefit of interim stay during pendency of appeals. The assessment for the period from April 2012 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no rhyme or reason for finalizing the assessment and also imposing penalty on the basis of the alleged non-disclosure. It is stated that the disputed invoice has been prepared by somebody behind the scene, making use of the 'TIN' belonging to the petitioner and this in turn came to be relied on against the petitioner, on the basis of the alleged KVATis data, referring to the irre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that Ext. P6 invoice produced by the petitioner in support of his case is dated '30.01.2013', whereas the disputed transaction pertains to April 2012 to October 2012 and hence not relevant. That apart, the petitioner came to know about the alleged mischief way back in May/June 2013 itself, as discernibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the available materials. Such orders prima facie appear to have been passed with proper application of mind, which cannot be intercepted by this Court invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the said circumstances, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed. However, considering the fact that time stipulated to satisfy the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
