2020 (7) TMI 542

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....service of notices to respondents. Shri E.I.Sanmathi, learned Standing Counsel appears for respondents No.1 & 3, the Income Tax Department. 2. The matter being in a short compass, as prayed for by learned advocates for petitioner and respondents No.1 & 3, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Petitioner has challenged the assessment order dated 30th December 2019 (Annexure-A) passed by the 1st respondent- Income Tax Officer, Bengaluru. On 12th March 2020, the Assessing Authority instructed second respondent bank to freeze petitioner's Bank account. Petitioner has filed an application before the Assessing Authority on 20th March 2020 seeking stay of assessment order and the Assessing Authority rejected the same on 23rd March 2020. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2019. He argued that though this is the factual matrix, the Assessing Authority has called these expenses as 'bogus expenses' and disallowed. Petitioner is thus not liable to pay any tax. Therefore, the conditional order passed by the PCIT directing the petitioner to pay 20% of the amount assessed in the assessment order is also not sustainable in law. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing this petition. 6. Shri Sanmathi argued opposing the petition. He submitted that the appeal is pending before the appellate authority and the PCIT has partly allowed the stay application and directed payment of 20% tax amount in six easy installments. When the appeal is pending, a writ petition challenging the assessment order is not maintainable....