TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 136
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 31.07.2017, for being entitled for stay of the demand of the remaining tax till the disposal of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). 2. Heard M.V.Swaroop learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Rajkumar Jhabkh learned counsel appearing for Mr.J.Narayanaswamy learned Standing counsel for the Revenue and perused the materials placed on record. 3. The respondent completed the assessment for the year 2015-16 under Section 143(3) of the Act by order dated 29.12.2017. In the said assessment order, it has been stated that on perusal of the documents submitted by the assessee, it was noticed that the assessee has shown gross receipts of Rs. 28,05,852/-, from M/s.Conde Nast (India) Limited, while as per form 26AS, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n getting the rectification done and requested for some more time. Subsequently, they sent a letter stating that due to non-cooperation of the deductor, they could not get the revision done. Consequently, the said difference amount was added to the returned income of the assessee and an order was passed. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 19.01.2018. In the mean time, notice for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, dated 28.12.2017, was issued and notice of demand was issued by the respondent under Section 157 of the Act, dated 29.12.2017. As the appeal filed by the assessee was pending before the CIT (A), the petitioner filed an applicat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f is sought, the said authority has to be necessarily be guided by the principles governing the exercise of jurisdiction under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 CPC. Thus, the authority while examining an application for grant of stay should consider whether the applicant has made out a prima facie case; whether the balance of convenience is in his favour; and if stay is not granted whether the applicant would be put to irreparable hardship. Thus, when a statutory authority exercises power to grant interim relief, he cannot be scuttled down by directives, which leave no room for discretion of the authority. 5. In my considered view, the CBDT Office Memorandum, dated 31.07.2017, though appears to fix a percentage of tax to be paid for being entitled to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gned order. The learned counsel referred to paragraph 'C' of the parawise comments in response to ground 'C' of the writ affidavit, wherein the Assessing Officer has stated about the financial position of the petitioner and has furnished certain facts and figures and submitted that the assessee does not have any financial difficulty in making the payment demanded by the Assessing Officer. Further, it is submitted that there is no necessity to afford an opportunity of personal hearing. 8. I find that the information furnished by the Assessing Officer in the parawise comments are not contained in the impugned order. The respondent cannot improve upon the impugned order by substituting fresh reasons in the form of a counter af....