2023 (10) TMI 568

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pending an appeal challenging the assessment order for the assessment year 2018-19, allowed the application subject to the petitioner/assessee depositing an amount of Rs.35,00,000/- out of the total outstanding demand of Rs.2,50,33,530/-. 2. Heard Sri C.P. Ramaswami, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for the respondents. 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner is an educational and charitable society engaged in activities of educational and medical relief. It is a society registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner's return was taken up for scrutiny and the entire gross receipts of Rs. Rs.5,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uthorities concerned for more than 2 ½ years and has only now been decided by the impugned order. The Appellate Authority in the meanwhile could have decided the appeal itself or have decided the rectification application itself and upon a decision on either of the two, the grievance of the petitioner could have got redressed. 6. Though the learned counsel for the respondents have entered appearance and filed their counter firstly denying the fact that there was a rectification application filed by the petitioner and secondly, that in terms of the circular governing the field, an order of payment of 20 percent out of the total outstanding demand cannot be found fault with. 7. The High Court of Bombay in the case of UTI MUTUAL FUND ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Where a strong prima facie case has been made out calling upon the Petitioner to deposit, would itself occasion undue hardship. Where the issue has raised a strong prima facie case which requires serious consideration as in the present case, a requirement of predeposit would itself be a matter of hardship. Finally, we express our serious disapproval of the manner in which the Revenue has sought to brush aside a binding decision of this Court in the case of the assessee on the issue of a stay on enforcement for the previous year. The rule of law has an abiding value in our legal regime. No public authority, including the Revenue, can ignore the principle of precedent. Certainty in tax administration is of cardinal importance and its absence....