Section 156 of the Income-tax Act, 1961—Demand— The petitioner only requested necessary adjustments be made from out of the tax refunds due to the petitioner through an application and until the petitioner's application is disposed of, the ITO to not insist upon compliance with the demand notice .

Facts: The challenge in this petition is to the notice issued by the Income-tax Officer (ITO) to the petitioners bank i.e Ratnakar Bank Ltd., requiring the bank to remit an amount of Rs. 33,42,040/- as dues towards the payment of Income tax by the petitioner.

Held, that demand can be stayed by the ITO provided, the assessee, pays 20% of the demanded amount pending the appeal against the assessment order. The 20% of he demanded amount comes approximately to Rs. 13,37,462/-. It is no as if the petitioner has declined to pay this amount. The petitioner by its application has merely pointed out that the tax refunds due to the petitioner are to the tune of Rs. 23,66,633/- The petitioner, has therefore only requested necessary adjustments be made from out of the tax refunds due to the petitioner. Until the petitioner's application is disposed of, the ITO to not insist upon compliance with the impugned notice dated 12-2-2020. The petitioner is also authorized to communicate the authenticated copy of this order to the Ratnakar bank Ltd., so that, the bank, need not act upon the impugned notice until it receives further orders from the ITO in this regard. - PIRNA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. V/s ITO - [2020] 22 ITCD Online 025 (BOM)