2012 (4) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Petitioners are directed to pay 50% of the total demand of Rs. 1.56 crores of which an amount of Rs.35 lacs was to be paid in the month of March and the balance in installments. By the second order, the Petitioners have been directed to pay an amount of Rs.30 lacs on or before 26 March 2012 while the balance was stayed until 31 July 2012 or until disposal of the appeal, whichever is earlier. 2 The First Petitioner is a public charitable trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and is also registered under Sections 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The First Petitioner conducts 10 educational institutions where over 12600 students are enrolled. It has employed 350 persons as members of the staff. It has been averr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for stay was filed before the Assessing Officer under Section 220(6). The application for stay of demand was heard on 8 February 2012 by the First Respondent. On 27 February 2012 the First Petitioner received a letter dated 10 February 2012 of the First Respondent, even before the application for stay could be disposed of, requiring the First Petitioner to pay the demand within three days, failing which coercive proceedings, it was stated, would be adopted. The Petitioner was called upon to produce evidence of payment of the demand of Rs.1.55 Crores. The First Petitioner filed an application on 29 February 2012 before the Director of Income Tax, the Second Respondent to these proceedings. On 14 March 2012 the First Petitioner received a cop....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to issue a cautionary observation to the effect that Assessing Officers and Appellate Authorities, when they dispose of applications for stay, act as quasi judicial authorities and not merely as tax gatherers of the Revenue. While they have a duty of protecting the interests of the Revenue, they need to mitigate the hardship to the Assessee and applications for stay must be considered objectively. In the present case the Assessee continues to have a registration under Section 12A, which has not been revoked. The Assessee has received the benefit of exemptions on the basis that it engages in a charitable purpose within the meaning of Section 2(15) until it has been denied the benefits for Assessment Year 200910. 6 Learned counsel appeari....