Grant of extension of stay for an outstanding demand under the Income Tax Act

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has granted an extension of stay for an outstanding demand of over £31 lakh for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee requested the extension due to delays in the disposal of their appeal, which were not attributed to the assessee. The Tribunal acknowledged this and granted a stay for six months or until the appeal is decided, whichever comes first. The assessee is also required to avoid seeking adjournments.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“I” BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

S.A. no.66/Mum./2021
(Arising out of ITA no.7189/Mum./2018)
(Assessment Year : 2014–15)

G.E. Power India Ltd.
Unit no.211–212, 2nd Floor
The Capital, G–Block, Plot no.C–70
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E)
Mumbai 400 051 PAN – AABCA8679F
……………. Applicant
(Original Respondent)

v/s

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle–1(1)(2), Mumbai
……………. Respondent
(Original Appellant)

Assessee by : Ms. Fereshte Sethnu a/s
 Shri Mrunal Parekh
Revenue by : Shri T.S. Khalsa

Date of Hearing – 18.06.2021 Date of Order – 18.06.2021

O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.

By way of this stay application, the assessee seeks grant of extension of stay for the outstanding demand of 31,35,68,000, pertaining to the assessment year 2014–15.

2. Before us, the learned Counsel submitted that the Tribunal in the present matter has granted stay vide order dated 14th February 2020 for a period of 180 day which was going to be vacated on 12th August 2020. However, on account of COVID–19, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has been from time to time passed interim orders granting / extending stay till 31st January 2021. The learned Counsel submitted that the delay in disposal of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee, as the corresponding appeal pending before the Tribunal was either adjourned due to non–functioning of the Bench or the assessee had sought adjournment. Accordingly, the learned Counsel for the assessee prayed for extension of stay till final disposal of the corresponding appeal, as the hearing of the corresponding is still pending with no fault on the part of the assessee.

3. The learned Departmental Representative on the other hand did not object to any of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the assessee.

4. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is brought to our notice that the Tribunal in assessee’s corresponding appeal granted stay vide order dated 14th February 2020. We notice from the record available before us that the assessee is not at fault for the delay in disposing off the corresponding appeal. Therefore, we are of the considered view that this is a fit case for grant of extension of stay in the following terms:–

i) The balance outstanding demand for the impugned assessment year is hereby stayed for a period of six months from the date of this order or passing of the order of the Tribunal in corresponding appeal filed by the assessee, whichever is earlier;

ii) The assessee shall not, except under exceptional and bona fide circumstances, seek adjournment during the hearing in of the corresponding appeal pending before the Tribunal.

Ordered accordingly.

5. In the result, stay application is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.06.2021

Sd/-                                                   Sd/-
MAHAVIR SINGH                             S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
VICE PRESIDENT                            ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

MUMBAI, DATED: 18.06.2021

Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1) The Assessee;
(2) The Revenue;
(3) The CIT(A);
(4) The CIT, Mumbai City concerned;
(5) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai;
(6) Guard file.

 True Copy

 By Order
 

Pradeep J. Chowdhury
Sr. Private Secretary
 

 Assistant Registrar
 ITAT, Mumbai