# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZriYCTrVvWAYIQLIbvh1E8jkueorSIL_AhnPmnvkYoA/edit#heading=h.rpds0auh3o8d

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2016 - 17: Rishabh File 12,crisis period, 18 lakh Ojha case

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2016 - 17: Rishabh File 12,crisis period, 18 lakh Ojha case

# data[].attributes.body
A demand was raised for the Assessment Year 2016-17. because of shifting location of hospital and take over of proprietory by DrM pvt ltd

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2021-22: GST issue Murali, covid & Immediate Post covid

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2021-22: GST issue Murali, covid & Immediate Post covid

# data[].attributes.body
Replied to the show cause Notice...Throughout 2021, Hope Hospital attended multiple appeal hearings and submitted various documentations as part of the ongoing tax litigations.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2013, Hope Multispeciality Hospital faced an income tax demand of Rs. 14,300 under Section 154. The demand was paid and the case was closed on February 11, 2022. A payment copy was sent to Kunjan via WhatsApp.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ay 15-16, 67 lakhs case File 2 Ruby, erroneously dismissed Appeal case

# data[].attributes.subject
Ay 15-16, 67 lakhs case File 2 Ruby, erroneously dismissed Appeal case

# data[].attributes.body
In 2022, the hospital's appeal for the outstanding demand of Rs. 67,05,060 was pending as books of accounts were required for the preparation of the same. Despite the penalty issues being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the CIT(A) dismissed the earlier appeal for 91 lakhs erroneously.

# data[].attributes.headline
2016-17, Shrikant , Hope Multi, NBFC interest certificate case

# data[].attributes.subject
2016-17, Shrikant , Hope Multi, NBFC interest certificate case

# data[].attributes.body
Demand - 2,28,660 Section 143(3) - 1,82,660 presently

# data[].attributes.headline
 OC BSNL RTTC BUILDING Assistant commissioner of incomtax

# data[].attributes.subject
 OC BSNL RTTC BUILDING Assistant commissioner of incomtax

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 16-17  DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 Demand - 90,700 is now 2,23,000 today Priyanka

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 16-17  DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 Demand - 90,700 is now 2,23,000 today Priyanka

# data[].attributes.body
DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 AY 16-17 Demand - 90,700 is now 2,23,000 today

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2016 - 17: Rishabh File 12,crisis period, 18 lakh Ojha case

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2016 - 17: Rishabh File 12,crisis period, 18 lakh Ojha case

# data[].attributes.body
A demand was raised for the Assessment Year 2016-17. because of shifting location of hospital and take over of proprietory by DrM pvt ltd

# data[].attributes.body
In 2018, an issue with Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) was identified at Hope Hospital. The specific details and outcomes were documented for compliance.

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2019 - 20 : Aniket 11, covid period,case closed, penaly to be closed

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2019 - 20 : Aniket 11, covid period,case closed, penaly to be closed

# data[].attributes.body
The issue is that the returns could not be filed on time.MORYANI wants 3 lakhs to close this case. paid 1.5 lakhs already another paid 2.5 by ruby total paid 4 lakh .Sachin Rupani: Has this file in Moryani's office...No addition made only penalty

# data[].attributes.body
In 2020, Hope Hospital faced new tax assessments with some pending issues from previous years. The hospital continued to work on resolving these in accordance with the law.

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2021-22: TDS issue Murali, covid & Immediate Post covid

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2021-22: TDS issue Murali, covid & Immediate Post covid

# data[].attributes.body
Throughout 2021, Hope Hospital attended multiple appeal hearings and submitted various documentations as part of the ongoing tax litigations.

# data[].attributes.headline
December 8, 2021: Ongoing Demand for AY 2015-16

# data[].attributes.subject
December 8, 2021: Ongoing Demand for AY 2015-16

# data[].attributes.body
On December 8, 2021, a notice was issued for an outstanding demand of Rs. 67,05,060 under Section 144 from the previous demand of 91 lakhs. An appeal was filed and the hospital required books of accounts for preparation. For penalty issues, the assessee filed under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and Form 5 was accepted. However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal erroneously.

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11KAQX-DL1E90_5kvEJnpqZk9qoC7Z_Sz1FhCaRDPTiI/edit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
 ₹18,31,842. 12/hope file number :  initially 9,52,523 Rs Show cause notice u/s 201(1)/201(IA) for non-deduction of TDS for F.Y. 2015-16 iMurali  TAN:264 CANCELLATION OF ORDER SINCE MORE THAN 1 YEAR) litigation income tax

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f9g6BE57Z5XBiZu0dIw_C1E3LaA24mkrDWy9SepkNoo/edit

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16SoivHLNYWDzO9oLFJVckXevDXbQtm7gkpI-6ge5bZg/edit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SOP for accountants Income Tax, TDS, and GST portals,

# data[].attributes.headline
File 10 FY 22-23- TDS - 3 pan card case...adjusted the demand 18 lakhs against refund of this year

# data[].attributes.subject
File 10 FY 22-23- TDS - 3 pan card case...adjusted the demand 18 lakhs against refund of this year

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HlRDt_6PiAneE6WPk-tRedufV5BZekllhzAbL-or3RU/edit

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 22-23, 3 Pan card story Shrikant File 10, Post covid 

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 22-23, 3 Pan card story Shrikant File 10, Post covid 

# data[].attributes.body
Dani Hiranwar joined in March 2024

Shanu Agrawal joined from 1st June

Adv Bhusari returned from Europe on 5th June 2024

Shishir Turkar took the TDS payments as his professional fees.

Nikhil Rathi Needed 80000 for filing returns.

Maheshwari used to Dr. Murali.B.K., Joint replacement surgeon and owner, Hope hospitals for 40000

CA chari, CA amit Karira

Adv Moryani will be contacted by Ruby for the penalty case

# data[].attributes.body
By 2024, Hope Hospital continued its efforts to resolve all pending tax issues, working closely with legal advisors and submitting all required documentation. Received show cause Notice for GST file No 13. with NPramod nikalje tried to resolve 18 lakh case, Ojha case file No 12.

# data[].attributes.headline
Disagree and write in Pvt ltd's portal. The portal is closed for protest. File grievience by Dani

# data[].attributes.subject
Disagree and write in Pvt ltd's portal. The portal is closed for protest. File grievience by Dani

# data[].attributes.headline
The parties have to revise TDS returns!  Aniket and suraj to report on 7th June 2024

# data[].attributes.subject
The parties have to revise TDS returns!  Aniket and suraj to report on 7th June 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 2019 - 20 : Aniket 11, covid period, case closed , Penalty to be closed.

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 2019 - 20 : Aniket 11, covid period, case closed , Penalty to be closed.

# data[].attributes.body
The issue is that the returns could not be filed on time.MORYANI wants 3 lakhs to close this case. paid 1.5 lakhs already another paid 2.5 by ruby total paid 4 lakh .Sachin Rupani: Has this file in Moryani's office...No addition made only penalty

# data[].attributes.headline
No demand  No Appeal No stay only show cause was sent

# data[].attributes.subject
No demand  No Appeal No stay only show cause was sent

# data[].attributes.body
Pravin called - Appeal after we get a demand from the department

# data[].attributes.headline
Notice was for initiation of penalty proceedings - awaiting - we will have to pay the penalty

# data[].attributes.subject
Notice was for initiation of penalty proceedings - awaiting - we will have to pay the penalty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.body
after we get a demand from the department

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KnHBtZSKan2ErlbS0vjR3Z-PC3kxCPOk/edit#gid=117966621

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IT and tds demand hope multispeciality, murali and DRM hope hospital pvt ltd .xlsx

# data[].attributes.headline
Ay 15-16, 67 lakhs case File 2 Ruby, erroneously dismissed Appeal case

# data[].attributes.subject
Ay 15-16, 67 lakhs case File 2 Ruby, erroneously dismissed Appeal case

# data[].attributes.body
In 2022, the hospital's appeal for the outstanding demand of Rs. 67,05,060 was pending as books of accounts were required for the preparation of the same. Despite the penalty issues being resolved under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, the CIT(A) dismissed the earlier appeal for 91 lakhs erroneously.

# data[].attributes.headline
2016-17, Shrikant , Hope Multi, NBFC interest certificate case..tds not deducted ... Interest tds disallowed as per adv Bhusari

# data[].attributes.subject
2016-17, Shrikant , Hope Multi, NBFC interest certificate case..tds not deducted ... Interest tds disallowed as per adv Bhusari

# data[].attributes.body
Demand - 2,28,660 Section 143(3) - 182660 presently as in the attached image at the end of this row

# data[].attributes.headline
Stay of demand - We have stay in this case

# data[].attributes.subject
Stay of demand - We have stay in this case

# data[].attributes.body
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:229bfede-5e16-47a1-9a45-4001b33f98d0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.headline
Appeal has been erroneously dismissed by the ITC (appeals)

# data[].attributes.subject
Appeal has been erroneously dismissed by the ITC (appeals)

# data[].attributes.headline
Stay of demand was rejected on 5th June 2024! Apply on 19th July as dictated by Bhusari

# data[].attributes.subject
Stay of demand was rejected on 5th June 2024! Apply on 19th July as dictated by Bhusari

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question 1. Can assessing officer grant stay of demand?

The assessing officer can grant stay of demand subject to payment of 20% of the disputed tax demand if an appeal is filed before the Commissioner (Appeal). The CBDT through its office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 29/02/2016 prescribed that stay can be granted subject to payment of 15% of the demand. However, this limit has been enhanced from 15% to 20% through another office memorandum F.No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31/07/2017.

Question 2. Can an assessing officer insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of the Tax demand?

The Assessing officer can insist on a lumpsum payment which is higher than 20% of Tax demand in the following situations: -
(i) Where the Supreme court or jurisdiction High Court has decided the issue in Revenue's favour on which issue the demand was raised by the department.
(ii) The assessee has past history of litigation and assessment on the same issue has been affirmed in appellate proceedings in the preceding years.
(iii) Survey operation has been carried out against the assessee or tax demand is based on credible evidence colleted in a search.

Question 3. Can a assessing officer grant stay on payment less than 20% of demand?

No, but he may refer the matter to the CIT. CIT may allow payment of less than 20% of the disputed demand if there are rulings which are in favour of the assessee either in his own case or by the jurisdiction High Court or by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Question 4. Is it necessary for the assessee to approach the assessing officer to stay the demand? Or is it necessary the A.O. must reject the assessee's prayer for stay of demand?

No, the power of the appellate authority to stay the recovery of the demand of dues which are subject matter of appeal pending before him is independent of the provisions of section 220(6) and it is not necessary that before invoking the power of the first appellate authority, an assessee should approach the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or that the Assessing officermust reject the assessee's prayer for stay of the demand.

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Tin Mfg Co. of India v. CIT [1995] 78 Taxman 249/212 ITR 451 held that Commissioner (Appeal) is vested with power of granting stay order for recovery of demand till disposal of appeal pending before him even if assessee has not approached the Assessing officer under section 220(6) or his application has not been decided.

The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Benches in the case of Employees Provident Fund Organisation v. Addl. CIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 41/839 ITR(T) 607/153 ITD 642 held that CIT(A) has inherent power to stay demand, when appeal is pending for disposal before him.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article discusses the various questions relating to to stay of demand with the help of case laws and judgement.

# data[].attributes.body
Spoke to Commisioner Pramod - Nikhalje - We need to go for 264. The other commissioner can revise the order. Then he will speak to the other commisssioner DK Jain is in place of OJHA

# data[].attributes.body
Met Vikas Chandra. AO in the office next to Gondwana club. Delay condontion and Appeal in CIT appeals. If not possible, then apply with ITAT immediately by Adv Bhusari.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

# data[].attributes.body
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14DoGLcRBqlFMqP-NYnSTF3dE-_Q0m8B1/view?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.headline
Pramod Nikalje has to influence the ITAT for this case

# data[].attributes.subject
Pramod Nikalje has to influence the ITAT for this case

# data[].attributes.body
Speak to him after the ITAT is filed.

# data[].attributes.headline
GST issue 6th June, gst for drmhope to be applied

# data[].attributes.subject
GST issue 6th June, gst for drmhope to be applied

# data[].attributes.body
Remove the director by the new CS so that we can apply for GST for drm hope hospital. CS Manali tihade

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ogbl#inbox/KtbxLrjNZjJVlLGQbRgfQKCRbsfmMHRbkg mailed and gave a physical copy to DK Jain. acknowledged receipt got

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gmail is email that's intuitive, efficient, and useful. 15 GB of storage, less spam, and mobile access.

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ogbl#inbox/KtbxLrjNZjJVlLGQbRgfQKCRbsfmMHRbkg

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gmail is email that's intuitive, efficient, and useful. 15 GB of storage, less spam, and mobile access.

# data[].attributes.headline
AY 16-17  DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 Demand - 90,700

# data[].attributes.subject
AY 16-17  DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 Demand - 90,700

# data[].attributes.body
DRM Hope Hospital Private Limited - TDS - (FY 2015-16 AY 16-17 Demand - 90,700 is now 2,23,000 today

# data[].attributes.body
Need to meet Jain and ask him to compound the interest. The documents are in the zip file ..https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGmtrNcKgqSfGPDkQDNgPGCZfdJ

# data[].attributes.body
Stay order to be got from DK Jain on 7th JUne 2024 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1inNIYJsyf3kSA_K85FqgU3-puOJUzDqFCkvmCrYqEBg/edit what is 264

# data[].attributes.body
File 7 - What were the submissions of Moryani

File 12- submission of 264 to be done.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1otiqHAMGnl7D1ywcxzmmqmq9S_2nuplISi_W3gPg5QE/edit This is CHATgpt version

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Application for Revision under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

# data[].attributes.body
File 2 - ITAT appeal file by adv Milid bhusari at 5 PM and get his and Dhani's advice..https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mhcTaYVfWndkLXlFMcWfuCnZpLqrd9XXTrCBgmZucwg/edit?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, chatgpt version ITAT

# data[].attributes.body
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16l2Mfml-0_JQUQdf55d3gUCx0hd2BO78/view?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.headline
Met and discussed with Bhusar on 7th June 2024

# data[].attributes.subject
Met and discussed with Bhusar on 7th June 2024

# data[].attributes.body
We have to go to CIT appeal under 154 - rectification of mistake apparent on record. This is done before ITAT. for rectification of mistake and condonation of delay. we were under the bonafide impression that the order passed is correct. He will find out have to appeal since no window in portal is open for filing appeal. remind by 13th June 2024. Mrudal Bhusari 8975050334 niece and advocate.

# data[].attributes.body
We dont have to retract appeal. Apply for 264. BY 20th June he will prepare the 264 application.

# data[].attributes.body
Get TDS returns to be revised.

Option 1 - ECHS and CGHS have to be asked to change the PAN card in the traces returns. This has to be in their CA. we will claim in this years returns.

Option 2 - approach AO .. ask him to accept the changed PAN.

Option 3 - Go for appeal after AO rejects the application.

# data[].attributes.body
7th June 2024 - RIshabh will report

# data[].attributes.headline
What are submissions of Moryani  - Ask Jain

# data[].attributes.subject
What are submissions of Moryani  - Ask Jain

# data[].attributes.headline
Ruby will followup. regarding penalty proceeding

# data[].attributes.subject
Ruby will followup. regarding penalty proceeding

# data[].attributes.body
This file is with Bhusari. Left by Ruby for reply. Got it back on 17th June. He dictated have the submission. I also shared the assessment order on whatsapp. rest of the submission he will share tomorrow.

# data[].attributes.headline
Change the email and mobile number in traces in partnership firm

# data[].attributes.subject
Change the email and mobile number in traces in partnership firm

# data[].attributes.headline
11 am open portals,reply to all notices,  meet vikas chandra

# data[].attributes.subject
11 am open portals,reply to all notices,  meet vikas chandra

# data[].attributes.body
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:AP:229bfede-5e16-47a1-9a45-4001b33f98d0

# data[].attributes.body
Link to be pasted here!

# data[].attributes.body
Paste link here

# data[].attributes.headline
On date 07/06/24 Trademark Questionnaire will be send to Makhija 

# data[].attributes.subject
On date 07/06/24 Trademark Questionnaire will be send to Makhija 

# data[].attributes.headline
On dt 07/06/24 copyright Questionnaire will be send to Makhija 

# data[].attributes.subject
On dt 07/06/24 copyright Questionnaire will be send to Makhija 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Maharashtra Industry, Trade and Investment Facilitation Cell,Promote investments into Maharashtra and facilitate business partnerships,Function as a clearing house for all investment related information, Assist the state/investors on various investment opportunities,Maharashtra Industry, Trade & Investment Facilitation Cell (MAITRI), the Government to Business (G2B) service, is one-stop-shop for existing and prospective investors to get consolidated information about the investment process with regards to expanding their existing manufacturing units or to set up a new manufacturing unit in the State. It primarily caters to the projects with investments worth INR10 crore and above, designated as Large, Mega and Ultra Mega projects under Industrial policy of Maharashtra 2013.

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ogbl#search/mantralay/FMfcgzGxTFXMhqDvzgHgMJxFVLKDVzdJ

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gmail is email that's intuitive, efficient, and useful. 15 GB of storage, less spam, and mobile access.

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PkfsDlUJjq6GyHbZYb4PBgd12UTy5ubXkwZSM96DHck/edit#gid=0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Organ Transplant  Kidney  Transplant registration 

# data[].attributes.body
As per the visit @insurance office they have said will do the inspection after 2nd week of June.

# data[].attributes.body
Address:- shop no.1, ekta apartment, behind S.D hospital, Ganesh Nagar, nagpur - 440024

1. Auto Cad Map

# data[].attributes.body
As per Khuje Said to give an proper 101 bed auto cad map after wards will come for inspection

# data[].attributes.headline
NABH 6 & 7th September Inspection HOPE Hospital 

# data[].attributes.subject
NABH 6 & 7th September Inspection HOPE Hospital 

# data[].attributes.body
Have to create a team need to assign task to each member

Need to start working on it on Priority basis and start assigning start

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NATIONAL ACCREDITATION BOARD FOR HOSPITALS & HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS (NABH) A Constituent Board of Quality Council of India Announcement Notices Events Quick Links Announcement Dated 29th May 2024 - NABH AYUSH Assessors' Training Programme from 15th to 19th July 2024 Dated 18th April 2024 - Notification for Implementation Plan of NABH Accreditation Standards for Allopathic Clinics

# data[].attributes.body
1. As per discussion Murali sir :- Savruchi will be getting 5000 per month for keeping her license

2. Priyanka - want her license to windrow

3. Nilesh - has issue with his documents his PPP card is expired

4. Ruchika - Said she have given her license to her house near by Pharmacy

(Note: it's mandatory to have 2 license in pharmacy to operate)

# data[].attributes.body
issue :

Rohit Bhure receptionist hope hospital has taken 10000 advance for his dad medication which he has told is admit in Neuron

Lokesh : Accountant has given him 10000 without cross checking for approval (for any matter related to money a written approval is mandatory)

Discrepancy : Rohit Bhure Salary was 8000 and he taken 10000, from the date he took salary advance he did not response to any call or messages and has not shown up @job (this kind of behavior is unethical and fraudulent need to take action on such nuisance on an immediate basis)

# data[].attributes.body
File No 11:- This File was closed

FY 18 - 19, Ay 19 - 20

Refund we got 1,25000/-

We approach moryani said will close said to give 4 lkh (was given to moryani)

Still we received Notice's

AO==> Dk Jain

==> We have to give rply to the latest issued notice & Penalty

==> As advice by (CA Dahani) will have to speak with CA Moryani

==>Return was not filled by - CA sahi turkar

==> have to speak with AO DK Jain

==> Ruby Mam have to meet moryani on monday 10/06/2024

==> With Murali sir have to go at AO Dk Jain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
income tax stay of demand granted file 12

# data[].attributes.headline
17th June - 1,12,590 to be paid tomorrow 18th june 2024

# data[].attributes.subject
17th June - 1,12,590 to be paid tomorrow 18th june 2024

# data[].attributes.body
FOR 3 ISSUES drm hope tds, 15-16 90700.late filing levy,Drm hope 23-24 12,270 interest on late payment , 22-23 drm 170 short ded\uction

# data[].attributes.headline
Mail sent to rectify the mistake of dismissal of appeal

# data[].attributes.subject
Mail sent to rectify the mistake of dismissal of appeal

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ogbl#sent/KtbxLrjdvnZrstPxrttNnvpQHcRqZprwSB. Prayer:

In view of the above, it is requested to:

1. Kindly rectify the mistake of dismissal of appeal (No - CIT(A)-1, Nagpur/10427/2017-18) as the dismissal is based on non-existent facts & thus the mistake is apparent from records.

2. Kindly revive the appeal and issue notice for hearing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gmail is email that's intuitive, efficient, and useful. 15 GB of storage, less spam, and mobile access.

# data[].attributes.body
They will need more details.

# data[].attributes.headline
Met Bhusari 17th June 2024- file with bhusari

# data[].attributes.subject
Met Bhusari 17th June 2024- file with bhusari

# data[].attributes.body
We dont have to retract appeal. Apply for 264. BY 20th June he will prepare the 264 application.

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LzWNs0fum1fcLjqXuQgJwzKLzMiElDq6e3pJxwLbrEY/edit

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12RIubBx5W9ZlprpyIIjGnc7txbvmwxBbMfaZgvs6eY4/edit

# data[].attributes.headline
whether it is worth persuing? keep writing to the AO

# data[].attributes.subject
whether it is worth persuing? keep writing to the AO

# data[].attributes.body
we have already submitted 2 interest documents. capital first and bajaj has been submitted!

# data[].attributes.body
https://chatgpt.com/g/g-UcAvEYiYg-6705060-income-tax-litigation-file-2-ay-2015-16

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ChatGPT - 67,05,060 income tax litigation file 2, AY 2015-16

# data[].attributes.headline
response u:s245 not to adjust refund demand dated 18.06.24

# data[].attributes.subject
response u:s245 not to adjust refund demand dated 18.06.24

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
response u:s245 not to adjust refund demand dated 18.06.24

# data[].attributes.headline
correction of assessment year in 245 notice

# data[].attributes.subject
correction of assessment year in 245 notice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
correction of assessment year in 245 notice

# data[].attributes.body
I had shown the letter to Adv Anand Totange and got his approval to submit the letter before submitting by hand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ayushman Hospital Application for MJPJAY 2020

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/popout?ver=nes63lsshymj&search=sent&th=%23thread-a%3Ar1500118853089301924&cvid=1

# data[].attributes.headline
Request Application for jeevandayee to health. minister on 21 jun 24

# data[].attributes.subject
Request Application for jeevandayee to health. minister on 21 jun 24

# data[].attributes.body
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/popout?ver=nes63lsshymj&qid=2655E504-4B6F-4983-AD0F-218B574BE8B1&search=sent&th=%23thread-a%3Ar-7865634767319523007&cvid=2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
reuest for jeevandayee to Heallth Minister 

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tzMPxTBCmDn6VR2Q-ad_S7MrF-IvHyKZYEeXWS4FylE/edit#heading=h.63nlcwdyo303