<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2000 (12) TMI 219 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60705</link>
    <description>A strong prima facie case is a relevant factor in stay proceedings before the Tribunal, but it must be weighed with prudence, discretion, balance of convenience and the risk of prejudice to recovery. Applying those parameters, the Tribunal found that the assessee had shown a strong case on appeal, the matter was listed for out-of-turn hearing shortly, and immediate recovery was unwarranted; the assessee&#039;s undertaking regarding fixed deposits also supported interim protection. Coercive recovery of the disputed demand was therefore restrained pending disposal of the appeals or further orders, and the Assessing Officer was directed not to give effect to the impugned appellate directions until the appeals were decided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:15:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99152" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 219 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60705</link>
      <description>A strong prima facie case is a relevant factor in stay proceedings before the Tribunal, but it must be weighed with prudence, discretion, balance of convenience and the risk of prejudice to recovery. Applying those parameters, the Tribunal found that the assessee had shown a strong case on appeal, the matter was listed for out-of-turn hearing shortly, and immediate recovery was unwarranted; the assessee&#039;s undertaking regarding fixed deposits also supported interim protection. Coercive recovery of the disputed demand was therefore restrained pending disposal of the appeals or further orders, and the Assessing Officer was directed not to give effect to the impugned appellate directions until the appeals were decided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>