TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1241
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is seen that the application for stay is detailed and in conclusion the petitioner has also sought personal hearing of the matter. 6.Stay application dated 01.03.2019 has been disposed of by the 1st respondent by the impugned order dated 12.03.2019 as follows: "Please refer to the above. With reference to the stay petition filed by you through your AR for the Asst. Year 2016-17, it is stated that as per the Govt. of India, CBDT Office Memorandum in F.No.404/72/93- ITCC dated 29.12.2016, in a case where the outstanding demand is disputed before CIT(A), the assessing officer shall grant stay of demand till disposal of first appeal on payment of 20% of the disputed demand. Accordingly, your petition for stay of demand has been disposed off. In view of the above, you are requested to pay 20% of the arrear demand for the Asst. year 2016-17 immediately and produce the copy of the challan on or before 20.03.2019 for our necessary action. Please note that failure to pay the demand by due date shall invite coercive measures for recovery of the arrear demand as per the provision of Income Tax Act, 1961." 7.No reference is made by the Officer to the facts of prima facie case, financia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re were no lapses on the part of the assessees." 3. The Board desire that the above observations may be brought to the notice of all the Income-tax Officers working under you and the powers of stay of recovery in such cases up to the stage of first appeal may be exercised by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax.' 9. Thereafter, Instruction No.1914 was issued by the CBDT on 21.03.1996 and states as follows: 1. Recovery of outstanding tax demands [Instruction No. 1914 F. No. 404/72/93 ITCC dated 2-12- 1993 from CBDT] The Board has felt the need for a comprehensive instruction on the subject of recovery of tax demand in order to streamline recovery procedures. This instruction is accordingly being issued in supersession of all earlier instructions on the subject and reiterates the existing Circulars on the subject. 2. The Board is of the view that, as a matter of principle, every demand should be recovered as soon as it becomes due. Demand may be kept in abeyance for valid reasons only in accordance with the guidelines given below : A. Responsibility: i. It shall be the responsibility of the Assessing Officer and the TRO to collect every....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sequently found that the assessee has not co-operated in the early disposal of appeal or where a subsequent pronouncement by a higher appellate authority or court alters the above situation, the stay order may be reviewed and modified. The above illustrations are, of course, not exhaustive. ii. In granting stay, the Assessing Officer may impose such conditions as he may think fit. Thus he may - a. require the assessee to offer suitable security to safeguard the interest of revenue; b. require the assessee to pay towards the disputed taxes a reasonable amount in lump sum or in instalments; c. require an undertaking from the assessee that he will co-operate in the early disposal of appeal failing which the stay order will be cancelled. d. reserve the right to review the order passed after expiry of a reasonable period, say up to 6 months, or if the assessee has not cooperated in the early disposal of appeal, or where a subsequent pronouncement by a higher appellate authority or court alters the above situations; e. reserve a right to adjust refunds arising, if any, against the demand. iii. Payment by instalments may be liberally allowed so as to collect the entire demand within a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued which are as follows: '....... (A) In a case where the outstanding demand is disputed before CIT (A), the assessing officer shall grant stay of demand till disposal of first appeal on payment of 15% of the disputed demand, unless the case falls in the category discussed in pars (B) hereunder. (B) In a situation where, (a) the assessing officer is of the view that the nature of addition resulting in the disputed demand is such that payment of a lump sum amount higher than 15% is warranted (e.g. in a case where addition on the same issue has been confirmed by appellate authorities in earlier years or the decision of the Supreme Court /or jurisdictional High Court is in favour of Revenue or addition is based on credible evidence collected in a search or survey operation, etc.) or, (b) the assessing officer 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 (e.g. in a case where addition on the same issue has been deleted by appellate authorities in earlier years or the decision of the Supreme Court or jurisdictional High Court is in favour of the assessee, etc.), the asses....