TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Smt.Merlin Mansy For The Respondent : sri. K.M.V.Pandalai, S.C JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P10 conditional order of stay, passed by the 2nd respondent, in an appeal preferred by the petitioner against an order of assessment, under the Income Tax Act, for the assessment year 2014-15. The main contention of the petitioner in the writ petition, in its cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was an amount that was found payable by the assessee, consequent to a dis-allowance of the deduction claimed under Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act. On the other hand, there was a separate amount of Rs. 68,25,000/- that was confirmed against the petitioner assessee, consequent to a finding that the amount represented tax payable on amounts received by the petitioner under the head 'income fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered the tax liability of the petitioner under the other head that was confirmed against him, namely, the tax amount towards income that was classifiable under the head 'income from other sources'. On the said issue, the 2nd respondent found that, inasmuch as the said income would not qualify for deduction under Section 80 P of the Income Tax Act, the decision of this Court referred above,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the grant of stay. Taking note of the plea of financial hardship urged on behalf of the petitioner, I am of the view that, as against the tax liability of Rs. 68,00,000/-, which the petitioner was directed to pay in six equal monthly installments starting from 18.07.2017, the petitioner ought to be directed to pay only an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-, within a period of two months from the date of ....