The Madras High Court stayed the condition of furnishing of bank guarantee on remission of 50% of disputed tax.
The petitioner in the matter is Burnt Umber Fashion Pvt. Ltd.
The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Appeal) and quash the same insofar as directing the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee for balance tax of Rs.12,73,884/- and further direct the Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Appeal) to accept personal bond for the sum of Rs.12,73,884/- instead of bank Guarantee pending disposal of appeal.
The assessment year in question is 2012-13. The Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Appeal) while admitting that the petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs.6,37,000/- being 25% of the disputed tax, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.6,36,885/- and furnish valid security by way of bank guarantee in respect of the balance of tax for an amount of Rs.12,73,884/-, on or before 07.06.2023
The counsel for the petitioner, N.Murali submitted that the direction to pay a sum of Rs.6,36,885/- has been complied with by the petitioner and further submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved against the condition imposed by the first respondent in regard to the furnishing of bank guarantee for the balance of the disputed tax and requests that the same be modified by directing the petitioner to furnish a personal bond instead of bank guarantee as directed by the first appellate authority.
C.Harsha Raj, Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly did not dispute the aforesaid position or contest the request made.
A Single Bench of the Madras High Court comprising Dr Justice Anita Sumanth observed that “In light of the aforesaid and taking into account the position that the petitioner has remitted 50% of the disputed tax, the petitioner is permitted to furnish a personal bond in respect of the balance of tax, to the tune of Rs.12,73,884/- within a period of four (4) weeks from the date on which the judgment was pronounced.”
The Court further noted that subject to the furnishing of personal bond by the petitioner, there shall be an order of stay of balance of the disputed tax till the disposal of the appeal by the first appellate authority. It was made clear that impugned order was modified to the limited extent alone.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
