Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (2) TMI 988

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner also seeks for a specific direction from this Court so as to call upon the respondent authorities to dispose of the appeal filed under Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the said Act) on 11.01.2019 for the Assessment Year 2011-2012. 2. Mr. Bag, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by drawing attention of this Court to the assessment order issued by the Assessing Officer would submit that although the petitioner had filed a return for a sum of Rs. 10,69,003/-, the Assessing Officer had determined the same to be Rs. 41,22,19,003/-. 3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order, the petitioner had filed the appeal under Section 251 of the said Act. 4. Simultaneously with the filing of the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC Online Cal 2563. He would also submit that the appeal has been unnecessarily kept pending for which the petitioner is suffering irreparable loss, injury and prejudice. Appropriate directions should be issued for expeditious disposal thereof. 7. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent authorities would submit that the order of attachment has been passed in the year 2019 and for more than six years there has been no challenge to such attachment order. The order of rejection of the stay application was duly communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner had chosen not to challenge the same and has approached this Court in December, ....