TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court dismisses petition challenging denial of stay of demand pending appeal</h1> <h3>PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PDA), PATIALA Versus CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH AND ORS</h3> PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PDA), PATIALA Versus CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CHANDIGARH AND ORS - TMI Issues:Challenge to communication declining stay of demand till the appeal filing time limit expiry.Analysis:1. The petitioner sought a stay of demand till the appeal filing time limit expired, referencing a Bombay High Court order for guidelines. The petitioner had previously obtained an order preventing encashment of fixed deposits until appeal decision. After the appeal was decided, the revenue was allowed to encash the deposits. The court noted there is no automatic stay of liability after an enforceable order is passed, citing a Supreme Court case regarding release of goods pending appeal.2. The court referenced a Supreme Court judgment stating that the mere filing of an appeal does not automatically stay the execution of a decree. It acknowledged that during the appeal process, the decree-holder can execute the decree, subject to restitution if the appeal is successful. The court emphasized that the execution of the decree during the appeal is subject to the property being restored if the appeal is allowed.3. The court concluded that the revenue was not barred from executing the order despite the petitioner having time to file an appeal. It found no merit in the petitioner's argument for a stay of recovery proceedings during the appeal filing limitation period. As a result, the petition was dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
