AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Asst. Year,Total demand Rs.,Amount paid Rs.
2009-10,"101,47,23,190","50,00,00,000
2010-11,"159,27,89,430","80,00,00,000
2011-12,"163,39,74,680","49,01,92,404
2012-13,"486,46,79,020","145,94,03,706
Total,"910,61,66,320","324,95,96,110
assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. For the assessment year 2011-12, the Hon''ble Single Judge has directed the petitioner to deposit 20%",,
of tax demand, which would in all account for 50% of tax demand for the assessment year and to furnish a bank guarantee for 25% of the tax",,
demand, in parity with orders made for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11.",,
So far as the assessment year 2012-13 is concerned, the Hon''ble Single Judge has modified Tribunal''s order by directing the petitioner to",,
furnish bank guarantee equivalent to 45% of the tax demand in terms of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.13601/2017.,,
An order under Section 254 (2A) of the Act is a discretionary order. Therefore, in our considered view, both Tribunal''s order as well as",,
Hon''ble Single Judge''s order cannot be classified as those which any reasonable person cannot pass. Therefore, we see no error in the discretion",,
exercised by the Tribunal and the Hon''ble Single Judge in modifying Tribunal''s order. Therefore, we refrain to interfere with the order impugned.",,
Resultantly, these appeals fail and are accordingly dismissed.",,
In view of dismissal of the writ appeals, the pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and the same are accordingly",,
dismissed.,,
Appeals dismissed.,,
We make no order as to costs.,,