{"id":13211,"date":"2016-04-05T12:59:50","date_gmt":"2016-04-05T07:29:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?p=13211"},"modified":"2016-04-05T13:04:28","modified_gmt":"2016-04-05T07:34:28","slug":"dimension-data-asia-pacific-pte-ltd-v-dcit-itat-mumbai-100-stay-of-demand-has-to-be-granted-in-high-pitched-assessments-as-per-instruction-no-96-of-1969","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/dimension-data-asia-pacific-pte-ltd-v-dcit-itat-mumbai-100-stay-of-demand-has-to-be-granted-in-high-pitched-assessments-as-per-instruction-no-96-of-1969\/","title":{"rendered":"Dimension Data Asia Pacific Pte Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Tribunal granted 100 percent stay of demand because:<\/p>\n<p>a) The assessed  income was more than 10 times the returned income. (Instruction 96 of 1969 was relied upon)<\/p>\n<p>b) The stand taken by the AO was at variance  with the stand taken by TPO.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Tribunal granted 100 percent stay of demand because (a) The assessed  income was more than 10 times the returned income. (Instruction 96 of 1969 was relied upon) &#038; (b) The stand taken by the AO was at variance  with the stand taken by TPO<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/dimension-data-asia-pacific-pte-ltd-v-dcit-itat-mumbai-100-stay-of-demand-has-to-be-granted-in-high-pitched-assessments-as-per-instruction-no-96-of-1969\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":64,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13211","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-judgements","category-tribunal","judges-amarjit-singh-jm","judges-sanjay-arora-am","section-1084","section-1467","section-article-5","section-article-7","counsel-sunil-m-lala","court-itat-mumbai","catchwords-stay-of-demand","genre-domestic-tax"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13211","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/64"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13211"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13211\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13211"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13211"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13211"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}