TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 437
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....income have been attached under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act') and for grant of stay of demand pending the decision of first appeal. 2. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that the assessee is engaged in the business of IT enabled services by processing, creation of software, sale of originally created sites which are attached to various search engines and is enjoying the benefit of Software Technology Park of India under Section 10-B of the Act and is also registered with STPI authorities. The petitioner had filed return for assessment year 2009-10 declaring income of Rs.1,30,09,970/- on 26.09.2009 and his case was picked up for scrutiny through CASS. The assessment was completed at a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but no orders had been passed. The petitioner had requested the Assessing Officer for release of the accounts in view of the financial and business positions and placed reliance upon the instructions of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'The Board') dated 21.08.1969 regarding the high pitched assessments and that the assessee was entitled to the stay of demand in case of such assessments. The Assessing Officer had issued notice under Section 221 of the Act requiring the petitioner-assessee to pay the whole of the outstanding demand on 30.01.2012 and the petitioner had submitted reply on 14.02.2012 that he had a good prima facie case on merits and the assessee fulfilled all the eligibility criteria of e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal income. The assessee had claimed a benefit under Section 10-B of the Act, but could not substantiate his claim by way of relevant documentary evidence and the proceedings of the earlier year did not debar the Assessing Officer to take a different view. The claim of the assessee that 67.83% of demand of Rs.1,69,09,583/- had been paid was not correct. The payment of Rs.44,84,986/- was on account of advance tax, self-assessment tax and TDS and was due towards the outstanding amount on original returned income which was to be paid to the extent of 100% by 31.03.2009. Only a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- had been paid and Rs.44,86,414/- had been collected under Section 226(3) of the Act and a demand of Rs.99,23,169/- was still payable. The assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and no payment plan had been submitted and accordingly the order had been passed under Section 226(3) of the Act. The bank accounts of the assessee had been released as the available credit balance had been remitted to the government treasury vide order dated 23.01.2012 and recovery of Rs.44,86,414/- only had been made from these accounts. The attachment was of Rs.3,47,045/- per month of rental income and interest income. 4. On the aforesaid premises, counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the appeals were pending before the CIT(A), respondent no. 2 was not justified in passing the order under Section 226(3) of the Act and attaching the bank accounts and the rent payment of the petitioner. Counsel for the department, on the ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcumstances of the case, treat the assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount in dispute in the appeal, even though the time for payment has expired, as long as such appeal remains undisposed of." 6. In pursuance of the application filed, respondent no. 2 passed the following order-sheet entries on 05.10.2012 and 08.10.2012:- "5.10.2012 Present Sh. N.L. Nasa, and submitted a copy of challan of Rs.10 lac paid by assessee on 25-9-2012. Challan Sr. No. 00002/BSR Code 0006604. Assessee has failed to submit the installment plan for the balance outstanding demand. Assessee to show cause as to why application for stay of recovery proceedings of the outstanding demand be not rejected as the assessee has failed to deposit eve....