HC sets aside ITAT order declining stay on Rs 1,200 cr demand on Samsung

The HC ruled that the tax demand was outstanding in case of Samsung and hence, the ITAT should have decided the stay petition on merits rather than dismissing it on ground of being premature

gavel law cases
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Bhavini Mishra New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Dec 02 2024 | 9:30 PM IST

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

The Delhi High Court (HC) on Monday set aside the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)’s November 22 order dismissing Samsung India’s application seeking stay on the tax department’s demand for Rs 1,213 crore.
 
By doing this, the HC has allowed the writ petition filed by Samsung India against the ITAT order wherein the tribunal had dismissed its plea as being premature since no coercive action was yet initiated by the tax department.
 
The HC ruled that the tax demand was outstanding in case of Samsung and hence, the ITAT should have decided the stay petition on merits rather than dismissing it on ground of being premature.
 
The order was pronounced by Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Swarna Kanta Sharma.
 
"In this case, the demand was already outstanding but no coercive action had been taken as yet to recover the demand. Many similar stay petitions are either dismissed or delayed from hearing on the ground that recovery proceedings are not yet initiated. This is a welcome ruling as taxpayers have been facing uncertainty as their bank accounts can be attached through recovery proceedings by the tax department, anytime by giving just a few days’ notice. So, even though the department hasn’t taken any coercive measure, the fact that the demand is outstanding, taxpayers can, as a pre-emptive measure, get a stay and would not have to worry about running to the courts when the department takes action,” Amit Maheshwari, tax partner, AKM Global, said.
 
The ITAT had said that Samsung's stay application was premature since no coercive action for recovery had been initiated by the AO (Assessing Officer).
 
The HC, however, held that given the fact that the demand is outstanding, the tribunal's reasoning that the application is premature is not sustainable. The stay application has been restored to the file of ITAT with directions to expeditiously decide the said application on merits.
 
Advocates Himanshu S Sinha, Prashant Meharchandani, Vibhu Jain, and Jainender Singh Kataria appeared for Samsung.
 
A detailed order copy is awaited.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :SamsungHigh CourtLaw

First Published: Dec 02 2024 | 8:13 PM IST

Next Story