Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
L. Purushotham Naidu,, R.R.Dist vs Acit, Central Circle, , Tirupati on 20 February, 2020
SA Nos 30 to 33 of 2020 Lekkala Purushoptham Naidu Narsingi.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Hyderabad ' A ' Bench, Hyderabad
Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member
AND
Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member
SA Nos.30 to 33/Hyd/2020
(Arising out of ITA Nos.717 to 720/Hyd/2017)
Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2009-10
Shri Lekkala Purushotham Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of
Naidu, Narsingi Income Tax, Central
PAN:ABGPL4958H Circle, Tirupati
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by: Smt. S. Sandhya
Revenue by: Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Date of hearing: 17/02/2020
Date of pronouncement: 20/02/2020
ORDER
Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.
All these S.As are filed by the assessee seeking stay of the recovery of the outstanding demand of tax for the A.Ys 2006- 07 to 2009-10 respectively. The total demand of tax for all the years put together is Rs.3,60,35,592/-.
2. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the total demand of tax including the interest portion for all the four years put together was Rs.4,30,35,587/- out of which, the assessee has already paid a sum of Rs.69,99,995/- which is more than 15% of the total outstanding demand of tax including interest. She submitted that the issues involved in the appeals are more or less covered in favour of the assessee as the demand has arisen due to sale of agricultural land which has been treated by Page 1 of 3 SA Nos 30 to 33 of 2020 Lekkala Purushoptham Naidu Narsingi.
the AO as business income. She submitted that the other additions u/s 69 of the Act are also prima facie in favour of the assessee. She submitted that all these appeals were initially posted for hearing along with other appeals and some of the appeals have already been heard while these appeals were adjourned and are coming up for hearing on 2.3.2020. She submitted that since the appeals are coming up for hearing and the assessee being an individual and has already paid nearly 15% of the tax demand, stay of the recovery of the outstanding demand of tax be granted.
3. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that the additions have been confirmed by the CIT (A) and the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and therefore, the assessee clearly does not have a prima face case for grant of stay. He submitted that without prejudice to the above, even if the Tribunal is inclined to grant stay, the assessee should be directed to pay some more amount.
4. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, we find that the appeals have been coming up for hearing since 2017 and are being adjourned for one or the other reasons and one of the connected appeals being ITA No.787/Hyd/2017 has already been heard and the order is awaited. Since the assessee has already paid nearly 15% of the total outstanding demand of tax, we direct the assessee to pay a further sum of Rs.15.00 lakhs on or before the end of Feb.2020 and subject to the same, the stay is granted for a period of 180 days or till the disposal of the appeals whichever is earlier.
Page 2 of 3SA Nos 30 to 33 of 2020 Lekkala Purushoptham Naidu Narsingi.
5. In the result, S.As filed by the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20th February, 2020.
Sd/- Sd/-
(A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Hyderabad, dated 20th February, 2020.
Vinodan/sps
Copy to:
1 Shri L. Purushotham aidu, D.No.3-6/9 Narsingi Heights, Narsingi
Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, RR Distt. 2 ACIT, Central Circle, Tirupati 3 CIT (A)-3 Visakhapatnam 4 Pr. CIT - Central, Visakhapatnam 5 The DR, ITAT Hyderabad 6 Guard File By Order Page 3 of 3