Dismissing the petition the Court held that , petitioner invoking the discretionary extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the Court is expected to approach with clean hands. Instead, there is gross suppression and misstatement, which led to a false projection of the outstanding liability due from the petitioner. Also, the Petitioner ought not to have sought adjournment before the CIT(A) on the ground that the earlier year is pending without seeking modification of the Court’s order. Writ Petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 5 lakh. (WP No 10289/2019 dt -4-03 -2020) (AY. 2011-12)
Indus Tower Ltd. v. ACIT (Delhi)(HC), www.itatonline.org Editorial : The Supreme Court has stayed recovery of the demand ,Indus Tower Ltd. v. ACIT (SLP No 9011/2020 dt 6-03 -2020) (SC)
S. 220 : Collection and recovery – Assessee deemed in default – Strictures – Tax recovery – Stay – Gross suppression and misstatement, which led to a false projection of the outstanding liability due from the petitioner -Sought adjournment before CIT(A) without seeking modification of earlier order – Cost of Rs 5 lakh imposed -Petition is dismissed .[ S.220(6) Art .226 ]