TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1058
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., for the Respondents P. C. The petitioner is before the High Court as impugned order dated 16.02.2021 has been passed negating request of petitioner to lift attachment over property under order dated 25.11.2019 and to give effect to order granting stay to recovery proceedings. 2. The petitioner had filed its return of income for AY 2010-11 which was selected for scrutiny and notices pursuant t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner's bank account with IDBI and the Bank had paid an amount of Rs. 5,16,266/- in compliance of the tax recovery officer's notices. The tax recovery officer had been calling upon the Petitioner to pay 20% of the total tax dues and furnishing details regarding assets held by the petitioner. Petitioner had also deposited a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- and also made further payment totaling to Rs. 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed another application requesting to stay the demand. Respondent No. 2 under order dated 28.01.2020 had been pleased to grant stay on the demand of tax for AY 2010-11 making the same subject to certain conditions. 5. In view of aforesaid, petitioner since February, 2020 has been requesting the respondent No. 1 - tax recovery officer to lift attachment over the property. Petitioner had been re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is adequate security for revenue under the same against entering into transaction in respect of property that would be released from attachment. 8. Mr. Walve, learned counsel for the revenue submits that had the petitioner deposited 20% of tax dues earlier, the property would not have been attached. He submits that as the assessee is in appeal, the tax recovery officer cannot sell the property t....