https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351347 The court upheld the modified instructions by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, requiring a 20% payment of disputed tax for a stay of demand disputed before CIT (A). In a block assessment case related to real estate transactions, the court considered the nature of the addition resulting in the disputed demand. The court modified the order to allow encashment of fixed deposits, provision of immovable property security worth Rs. 2 Crores, and stayed further demands and penalties. Failure to provide the required security would automatically vacate the stay order, emphasizing early appeal disposal due to the petitioner's individual status and high-pitched assessments. en-us Mon, 13 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2017 13:47:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351347 The court upheld the modified instructions by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, requiring a 20% payment of disputed tax for a stay of demand disputed before CIT (A). In a block assessment case related to real estate transactions, the court considered the nature of the addition resulting in the disputed demand. The court modified the order to allow encashment of fixed deposits, provision of immovable property security worth Rs. 2 Crores, and stayed further demands and penalties. Failure to provide the required security would automatically vacate the stay order, emphasizing early appeal disposal due to the petitioner's individual status and high-pitched assessments. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351347