| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1543 (Karn-HC) : (2020) 273 TAXMAN 0063 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 220
In light of the submission that there was attachment of bank account and in light of the direction being passed, the attachment already resorted to would be limited to 20% of demand and PCIT to dispose of the representation of assessee within a period not later than one week and attachment would automatically stand vacated.
|
Recovery of tax - Stay of demand - Stay of 80% of disputed demand till disposal of appeal, subject to payment of 20% of the demand -
Assessee challenged the notice issued under section 143 and also challenged the order of demand pursuant to the assessment order. Assessee submitted that as against the assessment order, an appeal was filed before CIT(A). It is further submitted that assessee filed an application for stay and had sought for interim relief and AO 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. Held: In light of submission that there was attachment of bank account and in light of direction being passed, the attachment already resorted to would be limited to 20% of demand. However, in light of the attachment being restricted to 20%, PCIT to dispose of the representation of assessee within a period not later than one week and if PCIT did not decide the matter within a period as stipulated, the attachment would automatically stand vacated.
REFERRED : M/s. Shriram Finance v. Pr. CIT (W.P. No. 5425/2019 & W.P. Nos. 6166 & 6168/2019, decided on 1-3-2019) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 2055 (Mad-HC) Flipkart India (P) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (W.P. Nos. 1339-1342/2017, decided on 23-2-2017) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 0650 (Karn-HC)
FAVOUR : Directions issued
A.Y. :
IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|