STAY ORDERS
To grant interim relief straightaway will jeopardize public interest.
Union of India & Ors. Vs Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. (SC) 154 ITR 135
Assistant Collector of Central Excise Vs Dunlop India Limited & Others (SC)154 ITR 172
Only when strong prima facie case is made out, in deserving and appropriate cases, Tribunal should grant stay.
ITO Vs M.K. Mohammed Kunhi (SC) 71 ITR 815
Khivraj Motors Ltd. Vs DCIT & Ors. ( Mad ) 205 ITR 462
Sri Balaji Trading Co. Vs DCIT & Anr. (Mad) 175 ITR 428
Non-compliance of Tribunal's direction was a clear act of contempt of court – extension of stay sought after stay granted expired – Application needs to be rejected.
Endeavour Investments Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT, Mad – TM) 70 ITD 17
Roxy Eng. P. Ltd. Vs ACIT ( ITAT, Chd ) 68 TTJ 482
No early hearing when demand is not huge – Bench has to order early hearing.
Olympia Paper & Stationery Stores Vs ACIT (ITAT, Mad) 63 ITD 148
Stay Petition moved by Public Sector undertakings – COD permission necessary.
Transmission Corpn. Of A.P. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT, Hyd) 97 ITD 171
Demand for several assessment years – separate stay petition necessary.
Wipro Ltd.Vs ITO (ITAT, Bang) 86 ITD 407.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.