Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Aspirant Mercantile Co. Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

2018 (1) TMI 338 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Grant of stay - staying the recovery of huge amount as prayed is made out - Held that:- Where gross violations of the law and injustices are perpetrated or are about to be perpetrated, it is the bounden duty of the Court to intervene and give appropriate interim relief. In cases where denial of interim relief may lead to public mischief, grave irreparable private injury or shake a citizenís faith in the impartiality of public administration, a Court may well be justified in granting interim reli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

There can be and there are no hard and false rules. But prudence, discretion and circumspection are called for. - There are several other vital considerations apart from the existence of a prima-facie case. There is the question of balance of convenience. There is the question of irreparable injury. There is the question of the public interest. There are many such factors worthy of consideration. In the case in hand, appeal is pending against the assessment order and earlier the assessment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has been filed by the assessee for quashment of order dated 27.3.2014 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax by which request for transfer of case to ACIT, Panvel Circle, Maharashtra has been rejected on the ground that the jurisdiction lies with the Circles/Wards of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Indore and order dated 31.3.2014 (Annexure P/2), order of assessment year 2011-012 by which learned Assessing Authority, assessed ₹ 1,52, 04, 69,498/- as incom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oner filed an application before the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax to transfer the case of the petitioner before the appropriate Officer, Maharashtra. On 26.8.2013, an objection challenging the jurisdiction of the ITO-3 (1), Indore has been filed under Section 124 on the ground that its registered office is situated at Taloja, Industrial Estate Raigarh, Maharashtra and Company had filed its return within its jurisdiction ITO at Panvel, Maharashtra. 4. A letter was issued to submit report for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

risdiction. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 passed an order of assessment on 31.3.2014 i.e., after the order passed by the Chief Commissioner on the question of jurisdiction on 27.3.2014. 6. The petitioner challenged the said order of assessment on 31.3.2014 by filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On the basis of the assessment order a demand of ₹ 69,17,14,030/- has been issued to the petitioner on 31.3.2014. The petitioner again filed a writ petition against 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

-03-2014 Annexure P/2 have been issued and after examining the legality and/or propriety thereof, quash the same. B) a writ of prohibiting and/or any other writ, direction or order for prohibiting and/or restraining the Respondents and in particular Respondent No.2 from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner for recovery of the demand on the basis of impugned order of assessment Annexure P/2. C) a writ of mandamus and/or other writ, direction or order jurisdiction the respondents to pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

grant of interim relief and directed the respondents that until further orders, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned assessment order (Annexure P/2). 8. An application for vacating stay has been filed on the ground that the writ petition has been admitted for final hearing and blankat stay order has been passed by this Court restraining the respondents from taking coercive action for recovery of huge demand of ₹ 69,17,14,030/-. 9. Learned Counsel f .....

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 he was the signatory authority on the return filed for the assessment year under consideration and notices were issued on 14.8.2013, 15.1.2014 and 28.2.2014, the assessee was not cooperated with the Department. In appeal, no application for grant of stay has been filed and if any prayer for stay is made before the Appellate Authority then 20% amount has to be deposited along with the appeal. To avoid the aforesaid statutory deposit, the present writ petition has been filed and prays for vacati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

raordinary situations, as for instance where the very vires of the statute is in question or where private or public wrongs are so inextricably mixed up and the justice require it, that recourse may be had to Art. 266. The Court must also have good and sufficient reason to by-pass the alternative remedy provided by statute. Matters involving the revenue where statutory remedies are available are not such matters. The present writ petition under Art. 226 in which order of assessment is also impug .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version