TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1535
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted and heard finally and are disposed of by this common order. 2. These writ petitions have been filed by the assessee, who is appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as `Tribunal' for brevity), Bengaluru, assailing common order dated 8.12.2017, passed in Stay Petition No.271/Bang/2017 in ITA.No.69/Bang/2014, Stay Petition No.272/Bang/2017 in ITA.No.68/Bang/2015, Stay Petition No.273/Bang/2017 in ITA.No.559/Bang/2016, and Stay Petition No.274/Bang/2017 in ITA.No.387/Bang/2017 respectively, for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2012-13. A copy of the said order is produced as Annexure-`A' to these writ petitions. 3. Petitioner is stated to be a Private Limited Company, incorporated under the provision....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal has mechanically followed the order of this Court dated 22.11.2017, passed in Writ Petition Nos.52358-52359/2017, which order was passed having regard to the factual matrix that arose in that writ petition and the same parameters could not have been applied mechanically in these petitions. Learned counsel drew my attention to Para-2 of the impugned order and submitted that for each of the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2012-13, which are the subject matter of appeals before the Tribunal, the total demand and the amount paid has been recorded and the Tribunal irrespective of the quantum of demand and the amount paid, has issued a direction without having any corelation to the dues and the amount paid. 5. He further submitted that in so f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stated therein that while granting any interim order, Courts must be circumspect, particularly when it concerns the revenue. He further submitted that when this Court in the earlier Writ Petition had directed payment of 55% and retaining balance of 20% as far as this very assessee is concerned, there can be no different parameter imposed in these cases which are in respect of other assessment years and that the earlier order may be followed. 7. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the fact that with regard to Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 are concerned, already there has been payment of 50% of the dues made by the assessee and the balance of 25% woul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessment Year 2012-13 also, it is about 30% of the outstanding dues, having regard to the order passed by this Court on 17.7.2017. The Tribunal while passing the impugned order and extending the stay, has followed the earlier order passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.52358-52359/2017, disposed of on 22.11.2017. In that writ petition, the facts were that out of the demand of about Rs. 129 Crores, 55% of the outstanding demand being Rs. 70 Crores, had already been paid voluntarily by the petitioner. In the circumstances, the petitioner was directed to retain balance of 20% in its account maintained with CITI Bank, Bengaluru, and on the said conditions being complied with, the stay was extended till disposal of the appeal pending befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the dues be deposited. The said order was assailed by the assessee in Writ Petition No.13601/2017. This Court by the order dated 17.7.2017, reduced the percentage to be paid from 50% to 30%. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said direction has been complied with. In the circumstances, the Tribunal, in my view, could not have once again directed the petitioner to pay 55% of the amount, having regard to the fact that the order dated 17.7.2017 has, for the present, attained finality and has not yet been interfered with in appeal. Though learned counsel for the respondent- Department submits that Writ Appeal No.5193/2017 has been filed by the Department against the said order, the same is pending consideration by the Divisio....