M/S.taminadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., [ Petitioner ] v. The Duputy Commissioner [ Respondent ] Of Incometax, Circle

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Fifth day of August Two Thousand TwentyPRESENT The Hon`ble Dr Justice VINEET KOTHARI and The Hon`ble Mr Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMYCMP No.16623 of 2016 in TCA No.766 of 2016 M/S.TAMINADU MERCANTILE BANK LTD., [ PETITIONER ]57, V.E. ROAD, TUTICORIN PAN: .VsTHE DUPUTY COMMISSIONER [ RESPONDENT ]OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-1,19A, W.G.C. ROAD,TUTICORIN Petition praying that in the circumstances stated thereinand in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleasedto grant stay of all further proceedings arising out of the order ofthe imugned order in ITA O 2297/MDS/2015 for the assessment year2011-2012 dated 20/07/2016 against the petitioner/appellant includingrecovery of demand TCA NO.766 of 2016. Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusingthe petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and uponhearing the arguments of MR.KAUSHIK FOR MR.S.SRIDHAR Advocate forthe petitioner and of MR.M.SWAMINATHAN Senior Standing Counsel forthe respondent the court made the following order:- O R D E R(Delivered by Dr.Vineet Kothari, J.) The Court was held by Video Conference, as per theResolution of the Full Court dated 3 July 2020, by Judges at theirrespective residences and the counsel, staff of the Court appearingfrom their respective residences. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Standing Counsel appearing forthe Revenue/Department has pointed out that by ad-interim ordergranted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 7.11.2016, ablanket interim relief was granted to the appellant/assessee. Thedemand against the appellant /assessee to the extent of Rs.13.76crores, as per the chart produced by him, against which, only 20% ofthe same stands paid by the assessee, whereas for the next AssessmentYear, approximately 50% of the demand raised for the similar issuehas been paid by the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that someadditional amount may be directed to be paid by the assessee subjectto final decision of this appeal. 3. After hearing the learned counsel, we direct theappellant/assessee viz., Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., to furtherdeposit a sum of Rs.4.00 crores within a period of four weeks fromtoday to the respondent Income Tax Department against the demandraised for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The said deposit shallremain subject to the final outcome of this appeal and recovery ofbalance amount of demand shall also remain stayed during the pendencyof this appeal, provided the appellant to deposit the amount ofRs.4.00 crores. In case, the appellant Bank fails to deposit thesaid amount, the interim order granted by this Court shall standvacated and the respondent/department shall be entitled to recoverthe whole of the demand in accordance with law. Sub-Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. ) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MADRAS ‘C’ BENCH. From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certifiedcopies of the Interim Orders in this formatVS 16.11.2016 SDR 28/08/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/