Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Petitioner has approached the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax on 07.02.2020 and had sought for stay of recovery of demand including the direction of Assessing Officer directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 61,17,317/- of the demand. Revenue submits that the petition is premature and no doubt, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has not passed any order on the representation of the petitioner dated 07.02.2020, but the same would be considered in accordance with law and in accordance with the existing circulars as applicable. Direction issued todispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period not later than one week from the date of appearance of the petitioner as noticed above. All contentions of parties are kept open. It is made clear that if the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax does not decide the matter within a period of one week as stipulated, the attachment would automatically stand vacated.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 220, 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961—Appeal— Assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) against the assessment order passed. Further the assessee had filed an application for stay and had sought for interim relief and the AO as per the order at Annexure-X has ordered that there would be stay of 80% of the disputed demand till disposal of the appeal, subject to payment of 20% of the demand. The assessee had approached the Principal CIT and had sought for stay of recovery of demand including the direction of Assessing Officer directing the assessee to deposit 20 % of the demand.
The Revenue submits that the petition was premature and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has not passed any order on the representation of the petitioner, but the same would be considered in accordance with law and in accordance with the existing circulars as applicable. High Court disposed of the writ petition holding that ”In light of the submission that there has been attachment of bank account and in light of the direction being passed, the attachment already resorted to would be limited. However, in light of the attachment being restricted, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period not later than one week from the date of appearance of the petitioner. All contentions of parties were kept open. It made clear that if the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax does not decide the matter within a period as stipulated, the attachment would automatically stand vacated. The petition was accordingly disposed off“. - MONARCH V/s ITO - [2020] 273 TAXMAN 063 (KARN)