2018 (11) TMI 1180

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gs. When the petitioner took the matters in appeal, the appellate authority passed a conditional order: the petitioner to pay 15% of the demand as a pre-condition to having further proceedings stayed. Aggrieved, the petitioner Company has filed this writ petition. 2. Sri Joseph Markose, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that though the Company has been an assessee since 2002, it has faced no scrutiny. In 2011, the Company's Director complained to the Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Cochin (CBI), about the demands by certain officials of the Income Tax Department for illegal gratification. Acting on the complaint, the CBI has laid a trap, the Senior Counsel further submits, and registered the Exts.P1 and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssment proceedings. He referred to the Company's allegations: the Company was never touched until 2011 when its Director complained about the graft. To refute that allegation, the Standing Counsel submits that the assessing authority does not select the assessees for scrutiny; it is a system-generated random choice. Perhaps the petitioner, according to him, had been lucky until then. 7. The learned Standing Counsel has drawn my attention to the Ext.P8 conditional orders in W.P.(C)No.35228/2018, Ext.P14 in W.P. (C)No.35229/12018, and Ext.P13 in W.P.(C)No.35301/2018. He then stresses that the orders are well-reasoned and require no interference. In this regard, he also submits that the Department's circulars mandate that the appellate au....