Pervez K. Raisi v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -19 & Ors
High Court
24 Jun 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Pervez K. Raisi v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -19 & Ors
Date of order
24 Jun 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Pervez K. Raisi v. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -19 & Ors, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
R.M. AMBERKAR
(Private Secretary)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1077 OF 2019
Pervez K. Raisi
..Petitioner
Versus
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -19 & Ors.
..Respondents
...................
Mr. Jitendra Jain a/w Chaitanya Patel i/by LJ Law for the PetitionerMr. Jitendra Jain a/w Chaitanya Patel i/by LJ Law for the PetitionerMr. Sham Walve for the RespondentsMr. Sham Walve for the Respondents
...................
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : JUNE 24, 2019.
P.C.:
1.The petitioner has challenged a condition imposed bythe Principal Commissioner asking the petitioner to deposit15% of the outstanding tax demand before 30.3.2019subject to which remaining recoveries will stand stayedpending the appeal against the order of assessment.
2.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties andperused the documents on record. Since the learned counselfor the petitioner submitted that there are number ofarguable points arising in the appeal. He therefore,
submitted that the requirement of depositing 15% of thedisputed tax must be reduced.
3.In facts of the present case, we do not find that thePrincipal Commissioner has acted unreasonably so as tointerfere with the said order. However, the petitioner mayhave making good the said requirement of 15% deposit. Thepetitioner has already deposited sum of Rs. 14 Lacs with theDepartment. The remaining amount may be deposited infour equal monthly installments. This shall be done in fourequal monthly installments falling due on 30th of everymonth starting with July, 2019. If this is done, there shall beno further recoveries pending the appeal filed by thepetitioner. If the petitioner fails to deposit any of theinstallments, this stay shall stand automatically vacatedwithout reference to the Court.
4.It would be open for the petitioner to request theCommissioner to hear the appeal expeditiously.
5.Petition disposed of accordingly.
[ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ]
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.