https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764123 Chhattisgarh HC allowed writ petition challenging rejection of stay application under Section 220(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer rejected stay application and subsequent review application through non-speaking orders without considering prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable loss, genuine hardship, CBDT instructions, and hi-pitched assessment factors. The court found authorities failed to follow proper procedure and guidelines established in KEC International Ltd. and UTI Mutual Fund cases, directing petitioner to deposit 20% of demand amount. en-us Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jan 2025 12:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764123 Chhattisgarh HC allowed writ petition challenging rejection of stay application under Section 220(6) of Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer rejected stay application and subsequent review application through non-speaking orders without considering prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable loss, genuine hardship, CBDT instructions, and hi-pitched assessment factors. The court found authorities failed to follow proper procedure and guidelines established in KEC International Ltd. and UTI Mutual Fund cases, directing petitioner to deposit 20% of demand amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764123