High Court of Bombay in the Writ Petion (LODG.) NO. 1424 OF 2012 , JUNE 22, 2012 Filed by Balaji Universal Tradelink (P.) Ltd. held that While considering/deciding the stay application under the said Act, the authority must (i) briefly state the case of the party; (ii) consider whether the party has made out a case for unconditional stay; (iii) the financial difficulty if pleaded be considered and (iv) in case the authority concerned comes to the conclusion that by granting of stay the assessee is likely to defeat the claim of the department then brief reasons for the same be indicated. In the present case, we find that the CIT(A) has completely ignored the parameters laid down by this court in the matter of KEC International Ltd. (Supra) and has passed an order without considering all the submissions of the petitioners and also failing to point out even briefly in the Order as to why the interim payment of 50% of Rs.6.36 crores is necessary in the facts of the present case. We do not suggest that the reasons must be elaborate for the order is only on an interim application. However, brief reasons indicating the basis of a prima facie view are necessary.Thursday, 4 October 2012
AO CANNOT REJECT STAY APPLICATION WITHOUT GIVING REASON
High Court of Bombay in the Writ Petion (LODG.) NO. 1424 OF 2012 , JUNE 22, 2012 Filed by Balaji Universal Tradelink (P.) Ltd. held that While considering/deciding the stay application under the said Act, the authority must (i) briefly state the case of the party; (ii) consider whether the party has made out a case for unconditional stay; (iii) the financial difficulty if pleaded be considered and (iv) in case the authority concerned comes to the conclusion that by granting of stay the assessee is likely to defeat the claim of the department then brief reasons for the same be indicated. In the present case, we find that the CIT(A) has completely ignored the parameters laid down by this court in the matter of KEC International Ltd. (Supra) and has passed an order without considering all the submissions of the petitioners and also failing to point out even briefly in the Order as to why the interim payment of 50% of Rs.6.36 crores is necessary in the facts of the present case. We do not suggest that the reasons must be elaborate for the order is only on an interim application. However, brief reasons indicating the basis of a prima facie view are necessary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Recent Landmark GST Judgments: A Comprehensive Overview
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime continues to evolve through judicial interpretations. From the Supreme Court to various High Court...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
In a significant development, the Supreme Court has dismissed the Revenue’s Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging a Bombay High Court (...
-
Sr No Due Date Related to Compliance to be made 1. 11.06.2026 GST ...
-
The introduction of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has brought significant changes to the pre-deposit framework for...
-
Selling a property can trigger a significant tax liability in the form of capital gains tax. However, the Income-tax Act, 1961, allows you...
-
With the government making Aadhaar Card ( unique identification card ) mandatory in procuring LPG connections, issuing passports, sale or...
-
This is to update you on procedure prescribed by the Office of the Development Commissioner, Karnataka Sub Zone (the “Office”) to be foll...
-
Introduction Employee welfare is a cornerstone of corporate responsibility, and gratuity forms a critical part of the social security benefi...
-
MARRIAGE EXPENSES - POWERS OF I.T. AUTHORITIES In the recent past the Income Tax Department has been concentrating on collecting informat...
-
The provision of a corporate guarantee, where one company pledges to cover the financial obligations of another (often a subsidiary or affil...
No comments:
Post a Comment