TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re concerned, the assessee has been directed to pay 15% of the said demand in five equal installments starting from the month of November, 2016 and total 15% amount has to be paid upto 05.03.2017 Additional Commissioner, Income Tax, Range-3 has rightly exercised his discretion and passed the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or perversity and the appeal has to be decided on merits, therefore, without commenting upon the subject matter of the appeal, so far as the order dated 08.11.2016 is concerned, no interference is warranted in the matter. - WP-7779-2016 - - - Dated:- 12-1-2017 - S. C. Sharma And Rajeev Kumar Dubey, JJ. ORDER Parties through their counsel. Regard being had to the sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner. Shri R.L. Jain, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Veena Mandlik, advocate for the respondent. Heard. 2. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who is Development Institute engaged in the Industrial Infrastructure Development of the State of Madhya Pradesh, is praying to stay the demand of income tax, interest and penalty for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2010-11 till final disposal of the pending appeals by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore in respect of tax interest and by the Appellate Authority in respect of the penalty and restrain the respondent from taking any coercive steps for recovery of demand pursuant to the demand letter dated 13.01.2015 (Annex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the penalty demand raised during financial years 2013-14, which is disputed by the petitioner in first appeal. The authority directed the petitioner to pay ₹ 5.8 crores on or before 16.01.2015. From the record, it appears that the aforesaid amount has not been paid. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has prima facie a strong case in its favour with respect to the nature of one time lease premium and in past, prior to assessment year 2003-04, the respondent has considered the lease premium as capital receipts and did not demand any income tax thereon. Further the payment of tax shall adversely affect the operations of the petitioner and development work shall suffer and therefore, prayed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order. In the meanwhile, on depositing ₹ 5.8 crores within a period of four weeks from today, no coercive measures for recovery of the demand, including attachment of bank account, will be taken till the stay application is decided; failing which, the interim protection granted to the petitioner shall automatically stand vacated without any further reference to the Court. 7. With the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. In light of the aforesaid, there appears no justification in taking a different view as taken by the Division Bench. Learned Additional Commissioner, Income Tax while deciding the application for stay of demand under Section 220 (6) of Income Tax Act has directed the assessee to pay the entire demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
