https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192170 Recovery of the disputed tax demand was deferred pending appeal because the assessee showed a prima facie case on attribution of income to an alleged permanent establishment and on the extent of taxable income. The Tribunal also noted that the disputed demand was disproportionately higher than the returned income, and that tax deducted at source exceeded the likely liability on the assessee's case, including only a limited mark-up being taxable. Applying the CBDT stay instruction and settled stay principles, the Tribunal treated these factors as sufficient to justify stay of recovery until disposal of the appeal. en-us Tue, 08 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 May 2017 07:26:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192170 Recovery of the disputed tax demand was deferred pending appeal because the assessee showed a prima facie case on attribution of income to an alleged permanent establishment and on the extent of taxable income. The Tribunal also noted that the disputed demand was disproportionately higher than the returned income, and that tax deducted at source exceeded the likely liability on the assessee's case, including only a limited mark-up being taxable. Applying the CBDT stay instruction and settled stay principles, the Tribunal treated these factors as sufficient to justify stay of recovery until disposal of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192170