TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 729
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioners challenge orders passed by the Assessing Officer and by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax rejecting applications for stay of demand arising from the disputed orders of assessment passed under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act'). 4. A perusal of the impugned orders would show that the orders are nonspeaking and merely call upon the petitioners to remit 20% of the disputed taxes without reference to the tri-fold aspects of prima facie case, financial stringency and balance of convenience. In fact, I have in order dated 13.07.2019 in W.P.No.3849 of 2019 considered a similar position and have passed the following order: 7. The parameters to be taken into account in considering the grant of stay of disputed demand are well settled - the existence of a prima facie case, financial stringency and theb alance of convenience. 'Financial stringency' would include within its ambit the question of 'irreparable injury' and 'undue hardship' as well. It is only upon an application of the three factors as aforesaid that the assessing officer can exercise discretion for the grant or rejection, wholly or in part, of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; (c)Demand for which a proper proposal for write-off has been submitted; (d) Demand stayed in accordance with paras B & C below. ii. Where demand in respect of which a recovery certificate has been issued or a statement has been drawn, the primary responsibility for the collection of tax shall rest with the TRO. iii. It would be the responsibility of the supervisory authorities to ensure that the Assessing Officers and the TROs take all such measures as are necessary to collect the demand. It must be understood that mere issue of a show cause notice with no follow-up is not to be regarded as adequate effort to recover taxes. B. Stay Petitions: i. Stay petitions filed with the Assessing Officers must be disposed of within two weeks of the filing of petition by the tax- payer. The assessee must be intimated of the decision without delay. ii. Where stay petitions are made to the authorities higher than the Assessing Officer (DC/CIT/CC), it is the responsibility of the higher authorities to dispose of the petitions without any delay, and in any event within two weeks of the receipt of the petition. Such a decision should be communicated to the assessee and the Assessing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Assessing Officer should always use in any order passed under section 220(6) [or under section220(3) or section 220(7)], the expression that occurs in the section viz., that he agrees to treat the assessee as not being default in respect of the amount specified, subject to such conditions as he deems fit to impose. v. While considering an application under section 220(6), the Assessing Officer should consider all relevant factors having a bearing on the demand raised and communicate his decision in the form of a speaking order. D. Miscellaneous: i. Even where recovery of demand has been stayed, the Assessing Officer will continue to review the situation to ensure that the conditions imposed are fulfilled by the assessee failing which the stay order would need to be withdrawn. ii. Where the assessee seeks stay of demand from the Tribunal, it should be strongly opposed. If the assessee presses his application, the CIT should direct the departmental representative to request that the appeal be posted within a month so that Tribunal's order on the appeal can be known within two months. iii. Appeal effects will have to be given within 2 weeks from the receipt of the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....demand to be paid by the assessee as lump sum payment for granting a stay of the balance demand.' 11. Instruction 1914 was further modified by Office Memorandum bearing number F.No.404/72/93 - ITCC dated 31.07 2017 as follows: 'OFFICE MEMORANDUM F. No. 404/72/93ITCC dated 31.07.2017 Subject: Partial modification of Instruction No. 1914 dated 21.3.1996 to provide for guidelines for stay of demand at the first appeal stage. Reference: Board's O.M. of even number dated 29.2.2016Instruction No. 1914 dated 21.3.1996 contains guidelines issued by the Board regarding procedure to be followed for recovery of outstanding demand, including procedure for grant of stay of demand. Vide O.M. N0.404/72/93-ITCC dated 29.2.2016 revised guidelines were issued in partial modification of instruction No 1914, wherein, inter alia, vide para 4(A) it had been laid down that 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 of15% of the disputed demand unless the case falls in the category discussed in para (B) thereunder. Similar references to the standard rate of 15% have also been made in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons precedent for the grant of stay as well as the Circulars issued by the CBDT and passed a speaking order. Of course the petition seeking stay filed by the petitioner is itself cryptic. However, as noted by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income tax vs Mahindra Mills, ((2008) 296 ITR 85 (Mad)) in the context of grant of depreciation, the Circular of the Central Board of Revenue (No.14 (SL- 35) of 1955 dated April 11, 1955) requires the officers of the department 'to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs. ....Although, therefore, the responsibility for claiming refunds and reliefs rests with the assessees on whom it is imposed by law, officers should draw their attention to any refunds or reliefs to which they appear to be clearly entitled but which they have omitted to claim for some reason or other......'. Thus, notwithstanding that the assesse may not have specifically invoked the three parameters for the grant of stay, it is incumbent upon the assessing officer to examine the existence of a prima facie case as well as call upon the assessee to demonstrate financial stringency, if any and arrive a....