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

2016 (6) TMI 1064 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2016 (6) TMI 1064 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - TMI - Pre-deposit - petition against the direction of pre-deposit of 25% of the disputed tax and to furnish bank guarantee for the remaining amount - Held that:- the Writ Petitions filed by petitioners are partly allowed, and the first condition, requiring the petitioners to pay 25% of the disputed tax in each of the cases are set aside, and the second condition, requiring the petitioners to furnish bank stands modified and the petitioners are hereby, dire .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ondents : Mr. V. Haribabu Additional Government Pleader ORDER These Writ Petitions, viz., W.P.Nos.3141 to 3143 and 6294 to 6296 of 2016, have been filed by M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., (for short, 'IOCL'), seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the second respondent/Joint Commissioner (CT) (Appeals) in Applications praying for stay of collection of the balance amount of tax, demanded from them, and consequently, to direct the second respondent to 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

rned counsel for petitioners, and Mr.V.Haribabu, learned Additional Government Pleader, for respondents. 5. It may not be necessary to go into the factual aspects of the matters, as to what was the nature of transaction, as to how the Assessing Authority proceeded with the matter, etc., for the simple reason that, this Court is called upon to examine as to whether the exercise of discretion by the Appellate Authority, while granting order of stay is proper and justified. 6. It is not in dispute .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

concerned, viz., the condition requiring the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee, this Court, in several cases, interfered with such condition, taking into consideration the plight of the dealer and the balance of convenience, especially, when pre-deposit has been effected and to safeguard the revenue, and modified the condition as one of furnishing personal bond. 7. In the cases on hand, there is no reason as to why such indulgence should not be shown to the petitioners, moreso when the petit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

harat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) to another Oil Company, via PDS route, was exempted from sale tax, in terms of the notification issued under the provisions of Orissa Sales Tax Act. Before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, application was filed for grant of stay, which was refused, as against which, Revision was preferred before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, who partly allowed the Revision Petition, and directed the appellant therein to pay a sum of ₹ 65,00,000/-. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on two reasons that the appellant therein was a public sector undertaking, in a priority sector, and the demand was, ₹ 1.34 Crores approximately, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, to call upon BPCL to deposit a huge amount of ₹ 1.34 Crores approximately, would have a serious effect on the PDS Sales, and the Court was satisfied that BPCL is a substantial company, and it is in a sound financial position, and it can discharge its liability at a later date, if need be. The Hon' .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

transaction, which is the subject matter of dispute. However, this will not, in any manner, alter the decision, since the petitioners herein are also a public sector Company/ Corporation. 9. The details as to what is the amount of tax and penalty demanded from the petitioner; 25 % of the disputed tax paid by the petitioner as pre deposit; now, the amount sought to be demanded from the petitioner, excluding the mandatory deposit of 25%, are set out in the form of a tabulated columns below under t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8,50,03,555 Rs.1,42,50,178.00 CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION Sl.No. W.P.No. Assessment years Tax demanded Penalty 1 8015/2016 2010-11 Rs.104,89,09,254.00 Rs.157,34,11,111.0 'B' Sl.No. W.P.No. Assessment years 25% Pre-Deposited Amount 1 3141/2016 2006-2007 Rs.1,41,81,122.00 2 3142/2016 2007-2008 Rs.9,40,79,858.00 3 3143/2016 2008-2009 Rs.4,76,91,001.00 4 6294/2016 2009-2010 Rs.4,49,21,944.00 5 6295/2016 2010-2011 Rs.14,40,85,815.00 6 6296/2016 2011-2012 Rs.7,12,50,889.00 CHENNAI PETROLEUM .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

011 Rs.26,23,14,606/- 10. As pointed out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it would be inequitable to call upon the public sector company to pre deposit this amount, as it may have other repercussion on the wellbeing of the Company, that too, at this stage, when the Appeal Petitions are pending before the Appellate Authority. That apart, when the Writ Petitions were entertained, interim order was passed on 01.02.2016, directing the respondents not initiate any recovery proceedings against the pe .....

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