Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court grants relief to petitioner in Entertainment Tax Act dispute, allowing stay of tax collection pending deposit.</h1> <h3>M/s. A.P. TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED Versus THE ENTERTAINMENT TAX OFFICER, AGAPURA CIRCLE</h3> The High Court granted relief to the petitioner, setting aside the order rejecting the stay of collection of disputed tax under the Entertainment Tax Act, ... Stay on collection of the disputed tax - Entertainment Tax Act, 1939 - rejection for application of stay - HELD THAT:- In this case, the petitioner is the Tourism Development Corporation wholly owned by the State of Andhra Pradesh. The period in respect of which tax has been levied, was a period when the State was a combined State. Even if the statutory appeals filed by the petitioner get rejected ultimately, the entire liability may have to be apportioned between the petitioner/Corporation and their counterpart in the State of Telangana. These issues have not been taken into account by the Additional Commissioner before rejecting the prayer for stay. Petitioner submitted that the petitioner/Corporation is running into huge losses. He has produced the Income Tax Returns for the financial years 2016-2017 and 2017-2018. They disclose that the petitioner/Corporation has been consistently incurring huge losses running into several crores of rupees. Therefore, undue hardship may be caused to the petitioner/Corporation, if the collection of the disputed tax is not stayed. Even if the statutory appeals are ultimately dismissed and the Assessment Order confirmed, the liability of the petitioner/Corporation may have to be shared by the Telangana Tourism Development Corporation - considering the due financial straits into which the petitioner is placed, some leniency should be shown to the petitioner. The Writ Petitions are allowed, setting aside the impugned Orders and granting stay of recovery of the disputed tax, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of ₹ 10,00,000/-. Issues Involved:Challenge to order rejecting stay of collection of disputed tax under the Entertainment Tax Act, 1939.Analysis:The judgment by the High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh involved the challenge by the Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Limited against the Additional Commissioner's order rejecting the application for stay of collection of disputed tax under the Entertainment Tax Act, 1939. The petitioner had filed separate statutory appeals against four Assessment Orders from 2010-2011 to 2013-2014. The Additional Commissioner had rejected the stay petitions, leading to the filing of the Writ Petitions. The Court noted that while the issue of prima facie case was considered by the Additional Commissioner, it was not the sole criteria for determining the eligibility of an assessee to stay pending appeal.The Court highlighted that the petitioner, a Corporation wholly owned by the State of Andhra Pradesh, operated during a period when the State was combined. Even if the appeals were rejected, the liability might need to be shared with the Telangana Tourism Development Corporation. The financial difficulties faced by the petitioner were emphasized, with evidence of consistent losses in the Income Tax Returns for 2016-2017 and 2017-2018. Considering the financial strain on the petitioner, the Court decided to grant leniency and allowed the Writ Petitions, setting aside the impugned orders and granting stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the Order.In conclusion, the High Court's judgment provided relief to the petitioner, emphasizing the need to consider the financial implications and potential shared liability before rejecting a stay application. The decision balanced the interests of the petitioner with the legal requirements under the Entertainment Tax Act, 1939, showcasing the Court's consideration of both legal and practical aspects in rendering justice.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found