Records 1 – 20 of 43 cbdt circular no stay demand instruction, Income Tax, Goods and services Tax, GST, Service Tax, Central Excise, Custom, Wealth Tax. Circular dated 29 Feb held not to supersede earlier Instruction dated 02 Feb in toto, but to only partially modify guidelines. August CBDT partially modifies instruction no. of for stay of demand and increases the payment requirement from 15% to 20%.
|Published (Last):||2 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||16.83 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.2 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Stay of demand – Deduction of income under S. It is quite instguction that the application for stay of demand has not been considered in the manner it was required to be Subrata Bhuiya, Kolkata v. The Assessing Officer not only did not pass any order thereon, but even though he was not inclined to entertain the application, he did not even deem it fit to isntruction the petitioner about the same. Filter by Judge Name Beta.
Vasan Health Care Pvt. Manipur High Court 1. Competition Commission Of India 0. Uttarakhand High Court 0. Consider putting the most unique dbdt important word here. Further, if the petitioner was not interested cbd personal hearing, his written submi Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission 0. Consumer Disputes Redressal 0.
Capital gain computation – reference to DVO – fair market value determ Respondent-State has appeared and filed their counter affidavit seeking to justify their Filter Filter through years using slider. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. There is remedy of appeal under Section 60 of the Act of against the order of the Certificate Officer.
Madhya Pradesh High Court. Securities Appellate Tribunal 0. Mohapatra submitted that in instruction No. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 0.
CBDT Modifies Guidelines For Stay Of Demand By The AO |Useful Miscellania
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission. Anand Transport Private Ltd. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal First Appellate Authority 0.
Jammu and Kashmir 11914 Court. Railway Claims Tribunal 0. Inviting the attention of this Court to Instruction No. Discount after Supply F: Authority For Advance Rulings.
Rajasthan High Court 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the department has rightly raised a demand Jagati Publications Ltd, Hyderabad v.
Himachal Pradesh High Court.
Rajeshwari Sangeet Academy Trust, jalandhar v. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. We have also examined the decision of this court instructlon the case of Soul v. Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that although Instruction No. Dhaka High Court 0.
Himachal Pradesh High Court 4. Stay petition – whether the assessee has made out a prima facie case for grant of an interim order?
CBDT Modifies Guidelines For Stay Of Demand By The AO
It is also not in dispute that in view of the modified Boards Instruction No. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
As pointed out earlier, the petitioner miserably failed to substantiate their contention that they are unable to mobilise funds to compl The Board has issued Circular vide F. Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange 0.
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal instructoin.