2012 (4) TMI 490

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....earned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.   2. It has been stated that the petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on real estate business. The petitioner firm is assessed on the file of the first respondent herein, under PAN No.AAZFS1507K. For the assessment year 2009-2010, the petitioner firm had filed its return of income, on 30....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cluded the same for assessment, during the assessment year 2010-2011, accounting for 96% of the work. The appropriate tax had also been paid. However, the first respondent had held that, since the petitioner had incurred costs to the extent of 91% of the contract, it ought to have considered 91% as the extent of completion of construction and not as 84%. Hence, the first respondent made an additio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 1961. However, the first respondent had rejected the application made by the petitioner, by his order, dated 20.2.2012.   6. Aggrieved by the said order, a stay petition had been filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax, the second respondent herein, on 29.2.2012. However, the second respondent, without appreciating the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, had rejected the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appeal filed by the petitioner, in respect of the assessment order, dated 29.12.2011, relating to the assessment year 2009-2010.   8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that if this Court is inclined to grant an order of interim stay of the demand of income tax, made against the petitioner, by way of the assessment order, dated 29.12.2011, relating ....