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>Resolution of Disputes Between State and Union Govt on Income Tax Notices: Court Urges Swift Action</h1> <h3>State of UP. And Another Versus The Commissioner, Income Tax And 3 Others</h3> State of UP. And Another Versus The Commissioner, Income Tax And 3 Others - TMI Issues:Challenge to notices under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding immovable property transactions between specified values.Analysis:The petition was filed by the State of U P and the Inspector General (Registration) challenging notices under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court initially directed the Inspector General of Stamps and Registration and the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow to convene a meeting to resolve the issues. Subsequently, it was informed that a meeting had taken place where both parties agreed to work together to resolve the dispute. An affidavit filed by the Joint Director of Income Tax (Intelligence), Kanpur confirmed that a meeting held on 17 July 2014 between the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow and the Inspector General (Stamps and Registration) had resolved the dispute. The minutes of the meeting outlined the agreement reached between the parties.The agreement stated that Sub-Registrars would provide information on immovable properties within specified value ranges in a prescribed manner, while the Income Tax Department would expedite the disposal of stay of demand petitions. It was also agreed that matters related to amounts already recovered by the Department could be resolved through the appellate procedure under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The meeting concluded with the resolution that Sub-Registrars would furnish the required information to the Income Tax Department as agreed, without prejudice to the legality of penal provisions for non-furnishing of information under Section 133(6).The High Court noted the agreed position between the State's Registering Department and the Union Government's Income Tax Department, and no further directions were sought in the proceedings. However, the Court directed that appeals against penalty orders imposed on Sub-Registrars should be decided expeditiously, and applications for urgent stay should also be promptly disposed of. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
