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>Challenge to Rs1 crore part-payment condition for stay of Rs35 crore tax demand dismissed as reasonable and justified</h1> <h3>VVF (India) Ltd. Versus State of Maharashtra and Others</h3> HC dismissed the challenge to an interlocutory order requiring the appellant to make a part payment of Rs.1 crore by adjusting Rs.3 crores as a ... Challenge to interlocutory order directing the Appellant to make a part payment of Rs. 1 Crore by adjusting the amount of Rs. 3 Crores as a pre-condition for stay of the total tax demand of Rs. 35 Crores or thereabouts - HELD THAT:- The contention that Rs. 3 Crores is the maximum liability cannot be accepted at face value. The same would no doubt be considered by the Appellate Authority in deciding the Appeal on merits. In any event, even considering the refund amount, the condition of part payment for securing interim relief restraining the Revenue from recovering Rs. 35 Crores or thereabouts cannot be regarded as unreasonable or arbitrary. The discretion has been exercised judiciously, and there is no question of law involved in this Appeal. In any event, assuming that there is any question of law about the exercise of discretion, the same will have to be answered against the Appellant. Appeal dismissed. The Appeal challenges an interlocutory order directing the Appellant to make a part payment of Rs. 1 Crore (after earlier payments) as a pre-condition for stay of a tax demand of about Rs. 35 Crores. The court held the matter does not raise a 'question of law' but concerns discretionary exercise by the Appellate Authority, and on review could not be shown that 'such discretion has been exercised perversely or by excluding the relevant considerations.' The court noted that, after earlier payments aggregating about Rs. 3-4 Crores and a refund of Rs. 35 Lakhs, the Appellant was granted interim relief preventing recovery of ~Rs. 35 Crores, and that the part-payment condition could not be regarded as 'unreasonable or arbitrary.' Any contention that liability cannot exceed Rs. 3 Crores was to be considered by the Appellate Authority on merits. The Appeal was declined and dismissed: 'we decline to entertain this Appeal and dismiss the same without any costs order.'
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
