Company in Tax Dispute Ordered to Deposit 5% The court directed the petitioner, a company facing income tax scrutiny for share premium categorization, to deposit 5% of the disputed demand within two ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The court directed the petitioner, a company facing income tax scrutiny for share premium categorization, to deposit 5% of the disputed demand within two weeks, expecting resolution of the appeal without further demands until disposal. This decision followed previous orders preventing coercive measures until appeal resolution and a directive for a 10% payment by the petitioner, emphasizing the need for compliance with modified instructions in the case.
Issues: Petition to quash demand notices for additional deposit and to prevent recovery of confirmed dues till appeal disposal.
Analysis: The petitioner, a company engaged in manufacturing outdoor fitness equipment, faced scrutiny by Respondent No.2 for issuing shares to investors. Respondent No.2 categorized share premium as income and issued a demand notice for income tax. An appeal was filed challenging this order, with a stay application pending. Despite this, Respondent No.5 issued repeated notices for payment, leading to a previous writ petition directing no coercive measures until appeal disposal.
Subsequently, the appellate authority directed the petitioner to pay 10% of the disputed demand, which was done. However, new demands were made by Respondent No.5 based on modified instructions, requiring 20% payment. The petitioner argued that the previous 10% payment sufficed until appeal disposal, seeking to quash the new demands.
Both parties presented their arguments, with the petitioner contending that the 10% payment already made should cover the demand until appeal resolution. Respondent contended that as per modified instructions, 20% payment was required, justifying the new demands.
The court noted previous orders directing no coercive measures until appeal disposal and the subsequent directive for 10% payment by the petitioner. Considering the circumstances, the court directed the petitioner to deposit 5% of the disputed demand in the new orders within two weeks, expecting the appeal to be resolved promptly without further demands until its disposal.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.