INCOME TAX REVIEW
|
Stay
Applications
|
-
Sections 220 to 232 of the Income-tax
Act deals with collection and recovery of taxes. These
provisions will become active every year in the months of
February and March. Probably each officer or Commissioner may
have to report to the higher authority the taxes outstanding,
and total collection of taxes in their charge. As the scope of
this Article is very limited. I will not deal with various
controversial issues of Recovery
Proceedings and will restrict only to few provisions which are
useful in our day-to-day practice.
-
Recovery proceedings under the Act can
be started against a person only when he is in default or deemed
to be in default in making payment of taxes. The assessee who is
in default or is deemed to be in default in making payment of
taxes may make an application, requesting the Assessing Officer
not to treat him as the assessee in default in respect of the
amount in dispute in the appeal preferred by the assessee. The
Assessing Officer may in his discretion and with or without
imposing any conditions pass an order, not treating the assessee
as an assessee in default in respect of such disputed amount
till the appeal is pending.
-
It may be noted that mere filing of an
appeal does not suo motu stay the proceedings of recovery of the
tax in demand. Therefore, it is necessary that as soon as an
order raising the demand is received, assessee must make an
application to stay and keep the demand in abeyance.
-
While filing Stay application before
the Assessing Officer, the assessee will have to give the brief
facts as under:
-
The assessment history of the assessee,
-
His conduct and co-operation with the
department,
-
Points raised in the appeal,
-
The chances of recovery in case the
appeal is dismissed and
-
The hardship that would be caused to
the assessee by persistent demand of the tax by the
department.
-
If an assessee's application u/s.
220(6) is not replied by the Assessing Officer, even though the
same was filed in time, the assessee can always contend before
the Tax Recovery Officer that before taking any action against
the assessee, his application for stay of demand should be
disposed of. The Tax Recovery Officer can also consider the
assessee's applications u/s. 225(1) and grant time for the
payment of any tax till the disposal of the assessee's appeal by
the First Appellate Authority.
-
In the event of Assessing Officer
rejecting assessee's application u/s. 220(6) of the Income-tax
Act, the assessee can prefer an application to the Commissioner
of Income-tax under whose jurisdiction assessee's case falls for
staying the demand of tax in dispute till the hearing and final
disposal of the assessee's appeal by the Commissioner of
Income-tax (Appeals).
-
If the Commissioner fails to discharge
his duty, the assessee may file a Writ Petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. However, when an appeal is
pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the assessee
can file a Stay Petition before the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal to stay the recovery proceedings.
-
The Central Board of Direct taxes in
its circular No.530 dated 6-3-1989 [176 ITR St. (240) and
Circular No. 589 dated 16-1-1991, 187 ITR St. (79)] has laid
down the guidelines for the Assessing Officer to exercise his
jurisdiction
u/s. 220(6) of the Act where an assessee has preferred an
appeal.
-
The discretionary power conferred by
section 220 (6) upon the Assessing Officer is coupled with a
duty and if he does not exercise it when the occasion calls for
it or if he exercise it in such a manner that it is no exercise
of discretion at all, he can be compelled to discharge his duty
by an order of the court.
[Ladhuram Taparia vs. B. K. Bagchi, 20 ITR
51, (Cal.) Shivangi Steels P. Ltd. vs ACIT, 226 ITR 62, 63
(All)]
-
Protective recovery of tax is not
permissible even though protective assessment can be validly
made. [Sunil Kumar vs.
CIT, 139 ITR 880 (Bom.)]
Representative assessee
Where an assessee dies before the issue of
the certificate, unless his legal representatives are served
with a notice of demand under section 156 and they fail to
comply with that notice within 30 days from the date of receipt
of the notice, they cannot be said to be "assessee in default"
and consequently no recovery proceedings can be taken against
them. [Satya Pal Verma vs. ITO, 106 ITR 540 (All) : Bai
Chandanben Jivanlal vs. I. D. Joshi, Collector, 74 ITR 448, (Guj)]
A recovery certificate issued or drawn up by
Tax Recovery Officer against a person who is already dead, is a
nullity. The certificate must be against a defaulter who is
alive. [Isha Beevi vs. TRO, 80 ITR 82, (Ker) on appeal 101
ITR 449, (SC)]. If an assessee in default dies before the
issue of a certificate in his name, proceedings under Section
159 of the Act are necessary to bring on record the name or
names of the legal representative or representatives.
Filing of claims
If any part of the property of an applicant
is illegally or unjustifiably attached, an objection under rule
11(1) of the second Schedule to the Act may be filed by him
before the Tax Recovery Officer who has got the jurisdiction to
adjudicate upon it.
Rule 58(a) of the Order XXI of C.P.C.
provides that the claim should be preferred before the property
so attached is sold.
Where a claim or objection is made under rule
11 against attachment of a property in execution of a recovery
certificate, it is the bounden duty of the Tax Recovery Officer
to first dispose of the objection and then to proceed further.
Investigation of a claim properly filed is essential. Even if
the property to which the claim or objection applies has been
advertised for sale, the Tax Recovery Officer ordering the sale
may postpone it, pending such investigation.
Where a claim or an objection preferred under
rule 11(1) of the Second Schedule is rejected or dismissed, the
party against whom an order rejecting or dismissing the claim or
objection is made may institute a suit, under rule 11(6), in a
Civil Court to establish the right which he claims to the
property. In Sawai Singhai vs. Union of India (AIR) 1966
SC 1968), the Supreme Court observed that the suit brought under
Order 21, rule 63 (corresponding to rule 11 (6) of the Second
Schedule), concerns not only with the question of possession but
also with the question of title.
The Hon'ble A. P. High Court in ITO
vs. Khalid Mehdi Khan (minor) 110 ITR 79, has taken the view
that the Tribunal can not only stay the recovery proceedings but
can also stay the proceedings before the Assessing Officer.
Therefore, in a case where order under section 263 is passed and
if the appeal is pending before Tribunal and in the meantime, if
the Assessing Officer starts the assessment proceedings then in
such circumstances, the assessee can file stay petition before
the Tribunal and the Tribunal can stay the proceedings before
the Assessing Officer. Please also see Ritz Hdrs Vyas, 185
ITR 311 (Bom).
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT
vs. Bansi Dhar & Sons 157 ITR 665 has taken the view that
the Tribunal can also stay the proceedings when the reference is
pending before the High Court. Therefore, in cases where the
assessee has lost before the Tribunal and the reference is
pending before the High Court and if the assessee is in a
position to establish that he is not in a position to make the
payment of tax in dispute, in such circumstances, the Tribunal
can stay the proceedings till the disposal of the reference by
the High Court.
It may be noted here that, before
filing the stay petition, it is necessary that the assessee
should approach the Commissioner to stay the recovery
proceedings. When Commissioner refuses to stay the recovery
proceedings, then only the Tribunal will exercise its power. In
case the Commissioner grants instalment facility but the
assessee shows his inability to make payment in instalment and
the Commissioner rejects the stay application then the power of
Tribunal can be invoked for stay. It may be further noted that
the assessee must also show that he has no liquidity to pay the
tax in dispute and if stay is not granted, great hardship will
be caused to the assessee.
The Finance (No.2) Act, 1998 with
effect from 1-10-1998 inserted sub-section (7) in section 253
prescribing for the first time a fee of five hundred rupees
whenever an application for stay of demand has to be filed
before the Appellate Tribunal.
The Finance Act, 2001 inserted two new
proviso to sub-section (2A) of section 254 with effect from
1-6-2001. As per the first proviso, where an order of stay is
made in any proceedings relating to an appeal filed under
section 253(1), the Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal within
a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of such
stay order.
As per the second proviso if such appeal is
not so disposed of within the period specified in first proviso,
the stay order shall stand vacated after the expiry of the said
period.
In view of the specific language of the
aforesaid second proviso, it is not only desirable but
imperative on the part of the assessee to file an application
for extension of the stay or granting of fresh stay, well in
time before the expiry of the impugned six months period.
Rule 35A of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal Rules, prescribes the procedure for filing the Stay
Petition. As per this rule, any assessee filing an appeal under
taxation Laws, before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may
prefer stay application in the following manner.
1.
-
Every application for stay of
recovery of demand of tax, interest, penalty, fine, Estate
Duty or any other sum shall be presented in Triplicate by
the applicant in person, or by his duly authorised agent, or
sent by Registered Post to the Registrar/Deputy Registrar or
the Assistant Registrar, as the case may be at the
Headquarters of a Bench or Benches having jurisdiction to
hear the appeals in respect of which the Stay Application
arises.
-
Where the application for stay
relates to demands, though for more than one assessment year
but under only a single statutory enactment, then a single
stay application would be sufficient in respect of the
demands for which the stay is sought. However, separate
applications shall be filed for stay of recovery of demands
under different enactments. It may however be noted that in
Wipro Ltd vs. ITO, 86 ITD 407 (Bang) the Tribunal
held that reparate stay petitions should be filed seeking
stay and recovery of different assessment years. But the
Bombay bench of the Tribunal in Chirangilal S. Gaonkar
vs. WTO, 66 TTJ 728 has held that a single afflication
can be filed.
-
The application for stay should, as
far as possible, be filed in the form as per specimen as at
Appendix X.
2. Every application shall be neatly
typed on one side of the paper and shall be in English and
shall setforth concisely the following:
-
Summary of facts regarding the demand
of the tax, interest, penalty, fine, Estate Duty or any
other sum, the recovery of which is sought to be stayed;
-
The result of the appeal filed
before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Deputy Commissioner
(Appeals), if any;
-
The exact amount of the tax,
interest, penalty, fine, Estate Duty or any other sum
demanded, as the case may be, and the amount undisputed therefrom and the amount outstanding;
-
The date of filing of the appeal
before the Tribunal and its number, if known;
-
Whether any application for stay was
made to the revenue authorities concerned and if so, the
result thereof (copies of correspondence, if any, with the
Revenue authorities to be attached);
-
Reasons in brief for seeking the
stay;
-
Whether the applicant is prepared
to offer any security in respect of the demand of tax in
dispute and if so, in what form;
-
Prayer to be mentioned clearly and
concisely (stating exact amount sought to be stayed);
-
The contents of the application
shall be supported by an affidavit sworn by the applicant or
his duly authorised agent; (Specimen application is
enclosed)
A specimen Stay Petition
CITC Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income
Tax
Index
Page Nos.
-
Stay application with Annexure giving
detailed reasons for seeking stay
-
Exhibits :
-
Copy of stay application filed before
Assessing Officer.
-
Copy of letter rejecting the stay
application passed by Assessing Officer
-
Copy of stay application filed before
Commissioner
-
Copy of letter rejecting the stay
application passed by Commissioner.
-
Copy of the acknowledgment of appeal
filed before the Tribunal.
-
Affidavit in support
Appendix - X
(Specimen Form of Stay Application)
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
——————— BENCH
STAY APPLICATION No. ————— of ————
IN THE CASE OF ———————— FOR THE ASSESSMENT
YEAR(S) —————
UNDER THE ———— ACT, ———— FOR STAY OF RECOVERY
OF TAX/INTEREST/
PENALTY/FINE/OTHER ITEMS
| 1 |
Name and address of the applicant |
: |
|
| 2 |
Act under which the demand is raised
(i.e. Income-tax etc. for which stay application is moved)
|
: |
|
| 3 |
Assessment year(s)
involved |
: |
|
| 4 |
Date of filing of appeal before the Tribunal and its number,
if known |
: |
|
| 5 |
From the demand give break up |
: |
|
| |
|
Tax |
: |
|
| |
|
Interest |
: |
|
| |
|
Penalty |
: |
|
| |
|
Fine |
: |
|
| |
|
Others |
: |
|
| 6 |
(a) Amount already paid |
: |
|
| |
(b) Amount outstanding |
: |
|
| |
(c) Amount which is not disputed
out of (b) |
: |
|
| 7 |
(a) Details of application for stay made
to the revenue authorities. |
: |
|
| |
1. A.O. 2. C.I.T. |
: |
|
| |
(b) Result |
: |
|
| 8 |
* Reasons for seeking stay |
: |
Annexure
'A' |
| |
(a) Whether the applicant is prepared
to offer security |
: |
|
| |
(b) If yes, in what form |
: |
|
| 9 |
Prayer stating exact amount soughtto
be stayed |
: |
|
| 10 |
If stay is sought in relation to a matter pending in reference before the High
Court give full particulars of R.A. No. and date etc. |
: |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Date :
|
Signature of applicant |
* Separate sheet may be used if space is not
sufficient
Note:
-
The application shall be made in
triplicate and shall be neatly typed on one side of the
paper with copies of all the relevant document including
demand notice, copies of correspondence with the Revenue
Authorities for stay of demand and copies of the letter
refusing stay of demand.
-
The content of the application shall
be supported by affidavit duly sworn in by the applicant
or his authorised agent.
-
The application shall be presented
by the applicant in person or by his authorised agent or
sent by registered post to the Bench of the Tribunal where
appeal was filed or which has got jurisdiction to hear the
appeal.
Annexure 'A'
Before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Bombay
Stay Application No.—————— of 1999
CITC Ltd.
Bombay - 400 058 |
....
|
Petitioner |
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income tax,
Asst. Range, IV (A), Bombay |
....
|
Respondent |
The humble application of the petitioner
above named most respectfully sheweth:
-
The Petitioner is a company engaged in the
business of house building activities for CIDCO, PWD etc. The
relevant Assessment Year is 1996-97 (previous year ending on
31-3-1996). The Petitioner Company filed the return of income on
29-7-96 showing income of
Rs.2,00,000/-. The Petitioner had maintained regular books of
account and shown the profit as per the books of account
maintained by them. The Petitioner further states that for
earlier years also, the books of account maintained by the
Petitioner has been accepted by the Assessing Officer. The
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Asst. Range rejected the book
results of the Petitioner and estimated the income of the
Petitioner at 10% of the gross receipts and assessed the income
of the Petitioner at Rs.10,00,000/- (Hereto marked Exhibit 'A'
is the copy of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of
Income-tax.)
-
Being aggrieved by the order of the Deputy
Commissioner of Income-tax, the Petitioner filed an appeal
before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The
Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), reduced the income
estimated by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax to 5% of the
gross receipts and confirmed the balance addition made by the
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, though in the earlier years
net profit shown by the Petitioner at 3% was accepted by the
Income-tax authorities. [Hereto marked Exhibit 'B' is the copy
of the order passed by the CIT (A)].
-
Being aggrieved by the order of the
Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Petitioner filed an
appeal before the Tribunal on 1-4-1999 and the same is pending.
-
The Petitioner submits that the estimate
of income confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)
was not correct. In the past also the book results of the
Petitioner was accepted by the Income-tax authorities.
-
The Petitioner states that though the
appeal is pending before the Tribunal, the Deputy Commissioner
of Income-tax started the recovery proceedings against the
Petitioner. The Petitioner vide their letter dated 1-4-99
requested the Assessing Officer to keep the demand in abeyance
till the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal. However, the
Assessing Officer vide his letter dated 15-4-99 rejected the
petition of the Petitioner and refused to keep the demand in
abeyance, till the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal.
-
Thereafter, the Petitioners vide their
letter dated 16-4-99 requested the Commissioner of Income-tax to
keep the demand of tax in abeyance till the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal. However, the Hon'ble Commissioner vide his
letter dated 20-4-99 rejected the application of the Petitioner
to keep the demand in abeyance till the decision of the Hon'ble
Tribunal. Hereto marked Exhibits 'C' 'D' 'E' and 'F' are the
correspondence with the tax authorities.
-
The Petitioner further states that they
are not having bank balance or liquidity to make the payment of
tax in dispute and if the department proceeds further to recover
the tax in dispute, great hardship will be caused to the
Petitioner and the business of the Petitioner may be ruined. The
Petitioner is also enclosing herewith the latest balance sheet
of the company and the bank statement to show that, the
financial status and the bank balance as of date (Hereto marked
exhibit 'G' is the copy of Balance Sheet and exhibit 'H' is the
copy of bank statement).
-
The petitioner further states that they
are prepared to offer the assets of the Company as security for
satisfaction of the department.
-
The Petitioner, therefore, prays:
-
That the Recovery Proceedings
initiated against the Petitioner may be stayed till the
disposal of appeal by the Hon'ble Tribunal.
-
The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,
or the Commissioner of Income-tax or their subordinates or
their successors may be restrained from taking any action as
regards recovery of tax, interest and penalty levied or leviable for the relevant assessment year.
-
The hearing of the Appeal may be
expedited.
-
Any other relief which the Hon'ble
members may deem fit and proper in the nature and
circumstances of the case may be granted.
I, the Director of CITC Ltd., state that
whatever is stated hereinabove in the Stay Petition is true to
the best of my knowledge and information.
Dated this
27th day of April, 1999 at Bombay |
For CIT Ltd.
Director
|
Affidavit
I, S. S. K., Director of CITC Ltd., having
office at Andheri (West) Bombay - 400 058, do hereby on solomn
affirmation state as under:
-
That we have filed the return of
income of the Company showing income of Rs.2,00,000.
-
That the Deputy Commissioner of
Income-tax assessed the income of the company at
Rs.10,00,000.
-
That in appeal, the Commissioner of
Income-tax (Appeals) partly reduced the additions made by
the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax.
-
That being aggrieved by the order of
the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), we have filed an
appeal to the Tribunal and the same is pending.
-
That we are sure that we have a fair
chance of succeeding in appeal before the Tribunal.
-
That we have no liquidity or bank
balance to make the payment of tax in dispute.
I say that whatever is stated hereinabove and
in the Stay Petition of even date is true to the best of my
knowledge and believe the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Bombay on the 27th day of April, 1999.
Identified by me
Advocate |
Director
Before Me.
|
|
|