https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767842 The HC dismissed the petitioner's request for a stay on tax recovery proceedings due to non-compliance with the mandatory precondition of depositing 20% of the disputed tax demand. The Court emphasized that filing an appeal does not automatically grant a stay, and the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient financial hardship to justify a waiver or reduction of the required deposit. Consequently, the petitioner must comply with the 20% payment requirement, or face coercive recovery measures. en-us Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 16:07:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767842 The HC dismissed the petitioner's request for a stay on tax recovery proceedings due to non-compliance with the mandatory precondition of depositing 20% of the disputed tax demand. The Court emphasized that filing an appeal does not automatically grant a stay, and the petitioner failed to demonstrate sufficient financial hardship to justify a waiver or reduction of the required deposit. Consequently, the petitioner must comply with the 20% payment requirement, or face coercive recovery measures. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767842