https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457065 ITAT Mumbai held that 20% stay calculation should be based on disputed demand, not total outstanding demand. Assessee challenged capital gain addition before AO and Tribunal under section 253(1). TDS deposited exceeded 20% of disputed demand per AO's computation. AO incorrectly demanded payment of entire outstanding amount plus additional 20%, ignoring Tribunal's directions. ITAT granted stay for balance disputed demand for six months or until order disposal, citing no fault by assessee and department's repeated adjournment requests. AO's interpretation was deemed incorrect. en-us Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Sep 2024 20:04:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457065 ITAT Mumbai held that 20% stay calculation should be based on disputed demand, not total outstanding demand. Assessee challenged capital gain addition before AO and Tribunal under section 253(1). TDS deposited exceeded 20% of disputed demand per AO's computation. AO incorrectly demanded payment of entire outstanding amount plus additional 20%, ignoring Tribunal's directions. ITAT granted stay for balance disputed demand for six months or until order disposal, citing no fault by assessee and department's repeated adjournment requests. AO's interpretation was deemed incorrect. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457065