<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (11) TMI 148 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252831</link>
    <description>CBDT stay guidelines were treated as binding on assessing authorities when considering stay of tax demand pending appeal. Because conflicting High Court decisions existed and the jurisdictional High Court had not adopted the Department&#039;s view, a prima facie case was found in favour of the petitioner. The balance of convenience also favoured stay, as the assessee was a co-operative society regulated under co-operative law and was not shown to be carrying on banking business with a banking licence. Severe financial hardship and irreparable prejudice supported interim protection, and collection of the demand was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2014 06:26:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 148 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252831</link>
      <description>CBDT stay guidelines were treated as binding on assessing authorities when considering stay of tax demand pending appeal. Because conflicting High Court decisions existed and the jurisdictional High Court had not adopted the Department&#039;s view, a prima facie case was found in favour of the petitioner. The balance of convenience also favoured stay, as the assessee was a co-operative society regulated under co-operative law and was not shown to be carrying on banking business with a banking licence. Severe financial hardship and irreparable prejudice supported interim protection, and collection of the demand was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>