TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e able to provide services to the public if directed to make the pre deposit. Although this does not qualify as evidence of financial stringency, this aspect warranted consideration. It should also be noticed that office memorandum dated 31.07.2016 (Instruction No.1914) does not make it mandatory that the assessee should remit 20% of the disputed tax demand. Solely for the purpose of enabling a reconsideration of the stay application by applying the classical principles of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable hardship, including financial stringency, the impugned order calls for interference. The impugned order is set aside and the stay application is remanded for reconsideration by the appellate authority / first respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er has made out a prima facie case was also not taken into consideration. By relying on a judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Sushen Mohan Gupta v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (2024)161 taxmann.com 257 , learned counsel contends that the office memorandum dated 31.07.2016 does not made it mandatory that 20% should be directed to be remitted and that the classical principles for grant of an interim stay should be followed. 3. Dr.B.Ramaswamy, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice for the respondents. With reference to the assessment order and the impugned order, he points out that the petitioner did not file the return of income or respond to several notices that were issued before the assessment order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exible option to the assessee to pay only 20% of the disputed tax and then the balance 80% of the outstanding demand can be stayed till disposal of first appeal. Accordingly, the assessee is hereby directed to pay the 20% of the disputed tax which works out to Rs. 4,91,87,117/- in two installments. The first installment should be paid on or before 28.04.2024 and the second installment should be paid on or before 28.05.2024. 5. It is noticeable that the appellate authority did not examine whether the petitioner has made out a prima facie case. The petitioner asserted in the request letter dated 21.08.2023 that it has limited resources and would not be able to provide services to the public if directed to make the pre deposit. Although this d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
