Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, The Commissioner of Income Tax, The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

2016 (9) TMI 1192 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Grant of interim orders - grant of stay - Held that:- The Officer, while considering the Stay Application, should consider the three factors pointed out above, should see as to whether the assessee has made out a case for grant of unconditional interim order/conditional interim order, or for rejecting the application for stay, in toto. Therefore, to do such exercise, reasons have to be recorded, and there is no such reasons assigned in the impugned order presumably, because, the first respondent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing for the petitioner that the certified copy of the order is yet to be received by them, and they would challenge the same before the Tribunal. - Thus the Appeals filed by the petitioner for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13, have already been disposed of, and the impugned assessment is relating to the year 2013-14, it would be suffice to direct the fourth respondent-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11 to consider the Appeal Petition filed by the petitioner on merits and in accor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d counsel, representing M/s.Subbarayaaiyar Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Standing Counsel, assisted by Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned counsel for respondents. 2. The petitioner is a Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, and the challenge herein is to the order passed by the Assessing Officer/first respondent, directing the petitioner to remit 15% of the demand of tax for the assessment year 2013-14, pursuant to the order of assessment passed unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lier orders of assessment, in particular, the assessment orders passed with regard to the years 2007-08 and 2008-09, wherein, the petitioner succeeded before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). 4. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would pray that the demand may be stayed, and the Appeal filed by the petitioner may be directed to be disposed of by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11. 5. At the time, when the Writ Petition was entertained, i.e., on 18.08.2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee, directing that no action for recovery, or no other coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner/assessee, pursuant to the impugned orders therein till the Appeals are heard and disposed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is also submitted by the learned counsel that, in respect of the assessment years 2007-08, and 2008-09, the petitioner succeeded before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and that, though the petitioner made a detailed submission in their Stay Petition, referrin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department pointed out that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11 is considering the Appeal Petition filed by the petitioner for other assessment years, and infact, orders have been passed for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13, by order, dated 06.09.2016. However, the learned Standing Counsel would submit that, in the light of the circular issued by CBDT, the petitioner should be directed to remit 15% of the tax, as quantified in 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

re put to challenge, and in the said Writ Petitions, condition was imposed for grant of stay. This Court, after considering the submissions on either side, and also taking note of the fact that, for almost 2 1/2 years, interim order was in force in one of the earlier Writ Petitions, and for about 1 1/2 years in other Writ Petitions, directed the Appeals itself to be disposed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, and made it clear to the respondents that pending disposal of the Appeals, no r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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