https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754293 The Bombay HC rejected the petitioner's challenge to the Tribunal's conditional stay order on tax recovery demands. The petitioner sought an unconditional blanket stay but the Tribunal imposed conditions including payment of Rs. 230 crores and furnishing corporate guarantee from an associate company with unencumbered assets exceeding Rs. 900 crores. The HC upheld the Tribunal's discretionary order, rejecting arguments that the recovery was protective in nature or that high-pitched assessments warranted blanket stays, citing petitioner's acceptance of similar orders in previous years. However, the HC modified condition (ii), substituting the corporate guarantee requirement with a guarantee from the ultimate parent company Vodafone International Holdings BV, Netherlands, as previously accepted by revenue. en-us Tue, 18 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754293 The Bombay HC rejected the petitioner's challenge to the Tribunal's conditional stay order on tax recovery demands. The petitioner sought an unconditional blanket stay but the Tribunal imposed conditions including payment of Rs. 230 crores and furnishing corporate guarantee from an associate company with unencumbered assets exceeding Rs. 900 crores. The HC upheld the Tribunal's discretionary order, rejecting arguments that the recovery was protective in nature or that high-pitched assessments warranted blanket stays, citing petitioner's acceptance of similar orders in previous years. However, the HC modified condition (ii), substituting the corporate guarantee requirement with a guarantee from the ultimate parent company Vodafone International Holdings BV, Netherlands, as previously accepted by revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754293