TMI Blog1997 (1) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for final disposal at the request of both the sides. The petitioner challenges the order made under section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which is at annexure " F " by which it was held that the assessee may not be treated as in default within the meaning of section 220(6) in case the condition imposed under the order was fulfilled and no coercive measures as provided will be taken to rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in fact an amount of Rs. 11,27,35,845 was due to be refunded to the petitioner-assessee and if the tax in respect of the covered points was excluded, the petitioner was not required to pay any tax. Reliance has been placed on behalf of the petitioner on Circular No. 530, dated March 6, 1989, in support of its contentions. As per circular No. 530, dated March 6, 1989, guidelines were issued b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion plant was covered by the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the case of the petitioner itself for the assessment year 1990-91 and the point in issue was also covered by the decision of this High Court and other decisions. As regards the depreciation claim of Rs. 28,31,73,245, in respect of the expansion plant and on other points in respect of guesthouse expenses of Rs. 16 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se facts and keeping in view the petitioner's claim for refund of Rs. 11,27,35,845, or the higher amount as orally suggested on behalf of the petitioner, which the petitioner would want to be adjusted against dues, if any, there was absolutely no justification for imposing the condition of paying 20 per cent, of the outstanding demand under the order made by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
