TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee before the third respondent in the pending appeal. Even with regard to the demand of interest, the petitioner has complied with the condition and 20% of the amount has already been collected by the department. Thus, I find that the interest of revenue has been sufficiently safeguarded and the petitioner should be permitted to pursue their appeal without the second respondent insisting upon any further payment pursuant to the impugned order dated 17.10.2017. While permitting the petitioner to canvass the correctness of the impugned order before the third respondent in the pending appeal, there will be a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 not to insist upon any further payment of tax or interest as per the impugned order dated 17. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). It has to be seen as to whether the petitioner should be compelled to pay a portion of the demand in terms of CBDT Circular for being entitled to an interim protection till the disposal of the appeal pending before the third respondent. Protectively, the petitioner has also preferred a tax case appeal challenging the order passed by the ITAT dated 19.04.2017 in TC.SR.No.86314 of 2017 and the same is pending. It is submitted that the revenue is also in the process of filing an appeal against the order of the ITAT dated 19.04.2017. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the assessment order dated 30.03.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 12,96,70,400/-. However, I am not inclined to issue such a direction for two reasons. Firstly, there has been substantial reduction in the demand of tax after the Tribunal remanded the matter. The correctness of such order is also now pending consideration before the third respondent in an appeal filed by the petitioner. Secondly, the tax demand had been reduced, then it goes without saying that the demand of interest also should correspondingly be reduced. But, I find that the interest charged under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act has remained the same, i.e. both in the order of assessment dated 30.03.2015 and the impugned order dated 17.10.2017. Therefore, this aspect has to be looked into and this can be canvassed by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
