2017 (5) TMI 489

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondents : Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Senior Standing Counsel ORDER 1. Notice. Mr. Rahul Kaushik, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondents accepts notice. 2. The short question involved in this petition is whether the Assessing Officer ('AO') was justified in declining the Petitioner's prayer that the percentage of pre-deposit for stay of the demand created as a result of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ould have, in the impugned order, discussed para 4(B)(b) of the aforementioned OM which provides that wherein AO is of the view that the nature of addition resulting in the disputed demand is such that payment of a lump sum amount lower than 15% is warranted that is in a case where addition on the same issue has been deleted by appellate authorities in earlier years, the AO should refer the matter....