Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Valmet Automation India P. Ltd, vs Dcit 15(3)(1), on 3 February, 2017
आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुंबई न्यायपीठ "के", मुंबई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH "K" MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
STAY APPLICATION No.35/Mum/2017
arising out of I.T.A. No.562/Mum/2017
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13)
Valmet Automation India बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner of Income
Pvt.Ltd., Tax-15(3)(1), Room No.473,
Vs.
(Formerly known as Mesto Aayakar Bhavan,
Automation India Pvt Ltd), New Marine Lines,
Plot No.A464, Valmet House,- Mumbai-400020
A464, TTC Industrial Area,
MIDC Mahape, ,Navi
Mumbai-400710
स्थायी ऱेखा सं ./ PAN :AABCM8258N
अपीऱधर्थी ओर से / Assessee by Shri M P Lohia and
Mr.Nikhil Tiwari
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Ms.Arju Garodia
सन
ु वाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 3.2.2017
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 3.2.2017
आदे श / O R D E R
PER RAJESH KUMAR, Accountant Member:
The assessee has moved this stay application seeking stay of outstanding demand of Rs.47,05,654/--pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13.
2. The Ld Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the demand of Rs.47,05,654/- has been created on account of TP adjustment by the AO. The 2 SA No.35/Mum/2017 ld. AR submitted before us that the total demand of Rs.47,05,654/- has been created comprising of Rs..29,79,249/- towards tax and remaining amount of Rs.17,26,405/- on account of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the demand has been created by the AO by making TP adjustment which has also been upheld by the FAA and the assessee has already filed appeal against the order of FAA on 25.1.2017. The ld.AR further submitted that the demand is purely raised due to difference of opinion and the assessee is likely to succeed in the final disposal of the appeal. Moreover, it is not possible to deposit the demand and therefore the same is prayed to be stayed. The ld. DR on the other hand, objected to the plea put forth by the ld.AR
3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material placed before us. We find that the total demand of Rs.47,05,654/- has been created by the AO which is outstanding against the assessee. The assessee has filed stay petition before us requesting the stay of demand citing several reasons for its inability to deposit the demand. After considering the arguments of the ld AR we find that this is fit case for granting of stay of demand. Therefore, the ends of justice would be met if the demand is stayed for a period of six months from today i.e. up to 3 rd May, 2017. Accordingly, we direct the assessee to pay Rs.7.5 lakhs against the outstanding demand upto 31.3.2017. Subject to the payment of the above amount, the balance portion of 3 SA No.35/Mum/2017 demand is stayed for a period of six months from the date of this order or till the date of disposal of the appeal, whichever period expires earlier.
4. In view of the foregoing discussions and subject to payment of Rs.7.5 lakhs referred above, we are of the view that the appeal of the assessee should be fixed in its regular course.. We also make it clear that the assessee should not seek adjournment on the date of hearing without reasonable cause, failing which the present stay order may be subjected to review by the division bench hearing the appeal.
5. In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 3.2.2017.
Sd sd (D.T.GARASIA) (RAJESH KUMAR) Judicial Member Accountant Member मंबई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated : 3.2.2017 Sr.PS:SRL:
आदे श की प्रतिलऱपऩ अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीऱाथी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपीऱ) / The CIT(A)
4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT - concerned
5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधि, आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गार्ड फाईऱ / Guard File आदे शानसार/ BY ORDER, [ 4 SA No.35/Mum/2017 उऩ/सहायक ऩंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, मुुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai