TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 655
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Income Tax<br>HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA Petitioner Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney and Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Advocates. Respondents Through: Mr. Shailendera Singh, Advocate. J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (Oral): 1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging orders issued by respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd., [2010] 189 Taxman 322 (SC). The petitioner/assessee, it is stated, is a loss-making company and directions passed to pay 20% of the penalty in instalments would have grave and serious consequences, as early decisions and adjudication is not in the hands of the petitioner alone. Subject to the petitioner depositin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deposited Rs. 10 crores with the Income Tax Department. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that during the pendency of the present proceedings and subsequent to the order dated 01st June, 2018, the entire penalty amounts for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 have been dropped and consequential appeal effect orders have been passed. 6. He states that what remains before ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals). 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that even if the present writ petition(s) are dismissed at this stage, the maximum amount that the petitioners can be directed to deposit pursuant to the impugned orders and circulars issued by the CBDT would be 20% of the remaining demand which can only be Rs. 1,71,03,416/-. 10. Keeping in view the aforesai....