Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Lucknow

Nirmal Singh, Ayodhya vs Ito Ward-1,, Faizabad on 25 July, 2024

          IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
               LUCKNOW BENCH "B", LUCKNOW

BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
        SHRI. SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                        S.A No.07/LKW/2024
                [Arising out of ITA No.83/LKW/2024]
                      Assessment Year: 2014-15

Nirmal Singh                  v.   The ITO
15/2/16, Janki Ghat                Ward - 1
Ayodhya, Faizabad                  Faizabad
TAN/PAN:BDSPS4165C
(Applicant)                        (Respondent)

  Aplicant by:                 Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate
  Respondent by:               Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R.
  Date of hearing:             23 07 2023
  Date of pronouncement:       25 07 2023

                            ORDER

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.:

In this case, the assessment order dated 30.03.2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer whereby the assessee's total income was assessed at Rs.2,71,15,320/- and a demand of Rs.3,17,15,320/- (including both tax and interest) was raised. The assessee's appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 03.01.2024. The assessee has filed appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 03.01.2024 of the ld. CIT(A) vide ITA No.83/LKW/2024. Separately this Stay Application was also filed by the assessee requesting for stay of demand. In the said application, it has been stated that the assessee has already paid Rs.21,27,000/- after the assessment. It is further stated that the balance demand payable is Rs.2,96,56,516/-. This Stay S.A No.07/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 3 Application has been filed requesting for stay of balance demand of Rs.2,96,56,516/-. The computation of balance demand is provided by the assessee in the Stay Application and is reproduced as under:

1. Tax Rs.1,63,05,243/-
2 Interest u/s.234B, 234C & 234D Rs.1,55,72,458/- 3 Total Rs.3,18,77,701/-
4 Less: Advance Tax Paid Rs.94,185/- 5 Tax Payable Rs.3,17,83,516/- 6 Less: Paid after Assessment Rs.21,27,000/- 7 Balance demand Payable Rs.2,96,56,516/-

(B) At the time of hearing before us, the assessee was represented by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate and Revenue was represented by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, ld. Sr. Departmental Representative. The representatives of both the sides were in agreement, at the time of hearing before us, that the assessee will pay monthly instalments of Rs.5 lakhs each till the entire demand is paid. They were also in agreement that the first instalment will be paid in the month of July, 2024 and other remaining instalments will be paid by the assessee by the last working day of the respective calendar months.

(C) As representatives of both sides are in agreement, and in view of the foregoing, this stay application is disposed of with the direction to the assessee to pay monthly instalments of Rs.5 lakhs each till the entire demand is paid. The assessee is directed to pay first instalment in the month of July, 2024 and to S.A No.07/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 3 pay other remaining instalments by the last working day of the respective calendar months.

(D) For statistical purposes, the Stay Application of the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/07/2023.

              Sd/-                             Sd/-
      [SUBHASH MALGURIA]              [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA]
        JUDICIAL MEMBER                ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DATED:25/07/2023
JJ:


Copy forwarded to:
      1. Appellant
      2. Respondent
      3. CIT(A)
      4. CIT
      5. DR

                                                    By order


                                              Assistant Registrar