TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to maintain a single statutory appeal against the adjudication order on deposit of 10% of the disputed tax demand, and whether the bifurcation of the demand into separate DRC-07 notices for tax and penalty could obstruct the filing of that appeal.
Analysis: The adjudication order gave rise to a tax demand and a penalty demand arising from the same proceedings, and the statutory scheme contemplated an appeal against the adjudication order on pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed tax demand. The issuance of two separate demand notices created an unwarranted obstacle to a single appeal and was not justified. The Court declined the revenue's request to permit withdrawal of the two notices and issuance of a fresh composite demand notice, while preserving the running of limitation from service of any fresh notice.
Conclusion: The petitioner was permitted to file a statutory appeal against the adjudication order on deposit of 10% of the disputed tax demand, and no further recovery was to be made during the pendency of that appeal upon compliance.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by protecting the assessee's right to pursue a single statutory appeal on the prescribed tax pre-deposit, while preventing coercive recovery during the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an adjudication order contains both tax and penalty demands arising from the same proceedings, the assessee's statutory appeal cannot be impeded by an unjustified bifurcation of demand notices, and the appeal may be maintained on the prescribed pre-deposit of the disputed tax demand.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
