Case LawHigh Court › Wtax/685/2019 Of M/S Supervalue Industri...

Wtax/685/2019 Of M/S Supervalue Industries Private Ltd v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others

High Court 27 May 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/685/2019 Of M/S Supervalue Industries Private Ltd v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others
Date of order
27 May 2019
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wtax/685/2019 Of M/S Supervalue Industries Private Ltd v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 Others, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Issue: In the instant case, the appellate authority while deciding the Stay Application of the petitioner, has rejected the applicationoutright without considering whether the lesser amount couldhave been accepted or not.

Decision: This being the case, we set aside the order of CIT passed on the Stay Application and direct the CIT to pass a fresh orderon the Stay Application in accordance with law within a week.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

Court No. - 35Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 685 of 2019Petitioner :- M/S Supervalue Industries Private Ltd.Respondent :- The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax And 3 OthersCounsel for Petitioner :- Suyash AgarwalCounsel for Respondent :- S.S.C. Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent and SriGaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. The petitioner has moved an application before the CIT for stay of the amount, which is to be paid under the CircularNo.404/72/93-ITCC dated 29.02.2019. The said Circularstates that the assessee may deposit 20% or even the lesseramount which may be considered by the authority in the factsand circumstances of every individual case. In the instant case, the appellate authority while deciding the Stay Application of the petitioner, has rejected the applicationoutright without considering whether the lesser amount couldhave been accepted or not. The petitioner on the other hand contends that he is not liable to pay any tax amount as the same has been wrongly imposed. This being the case, we set aside the order of CIT passed on the Stay Application and direct the CIT to pass a fresh orderon the Stay Application in accordance with law within a week. For a period of one week, no recovery shall be made againstthe petitioner. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition standsdisposed of. Order Date :- 27.5.2019Ajeet
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan