Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Royal Palms (I) P.Ltd, vs Dcit 13(3)(1), on 10 March, 2017
आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुंबई न्यायपीठ "डी", मुंबई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH "D" MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
श्री महाविर स ग
िं , न्याययक दस्य एििं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा दस्य के मक्ष
STAY APPLICATION No.159/Mum/2017
arising out of I.T.A. No.1478/Mum/2017
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13)
M/s Royal Palms (I) Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-
Royal Palm Estate, 13(3)(1),
Survey No.169, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan,
Aarey Milk Colony, New Marine Lines,
Goregaon East, Mumbai-400020
Mumbai-400065
स्थायी ऱेखा िं ./ PAN :AABCR9424R
अपीऱधर्थी ओर से / Assessee by Shri Haridas Bhatt
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 10.3.2017
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10.3.2017
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.13,71,04,560/- pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13.
2. The above said demand was raised by the AO in the assessment year 2012-13 while framing assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 2 SA No.159/Mum/2017 1961 vide order dated 31.3.2015. Various additions as made by the AO and the grounds raised by the assessee are as under :
Gr. Amount Reason Explanation
1 54715089 Jottings on Loose Entry wise explanation given reconciling with books
papers
2 49400000 Cash credit based on The amount was estimated even on survey without
sale of 8 plots any evidence, Only one plot was sold, hence no income
possible
3 25334950 Based on diary Relates to A. Y. 2010-11 and 2011-12 additions already
made
4 28849438 Advance Received Advances in books on date of survey- Project completed
considered as and income declared at the end of the year.
income. Golden Isle
Thai House
5 74251249 Advance Received Advances in books on date of survey- agreed as sales
considered as during survey - Project not completed, Income
income declared based on percentage completion
6 97532090 Advance Received Advances in books on date of survey-Project not
considered as completed, Income declared based on percentage
income completion
7 25186010 Bogus purchases Addition made based in earlier year additions. No MVAT
information for this year. Earlier years confirmed at 12.5% At the outset, the Ld Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the the assessee already being paying the installment at the rate of Rs.5 lakhs per month and has already deposited a sum of Rs.76,60,000/-. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has very good case on merit and has raised various grounds of appeal hereinabove and there is every probability to succeed in the appeal proceedings before the Tribunal. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee is not in a position to deposit any money except the amount of Rs.5 lakhs by way of monthly installments as is being paid presently and prayed for stay of demand 3 SA No.159/Mum/2017 of balance amount subject to payment of Rs.5 lakhs per month. The ld.AR also submitted that the AO may take coercive measure to recover the demand raised by him by way of attachment of bank account of the assessee by which the business operation of the assessee would be adversely affected. The ld. AR finally submitted that in view of duplicate addition made without taking in account the evidence and relying on the evidence which are factually incorrect the stay may be granted.
3. The ld. DR strongly objected to the grant of stay as prayed for by the ld.AR and submitted that the assessee be directed to pay entire amount as the FAA has already confirmed the additions on various grounds.
4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material placed before us. We find that the assessee at present is paying Rs.5 lakhs per month. Now by way of this stay application, the assessee has requested to stay the entire demand on the same condition by pleading various reasons such as the demand being raised on the miss-appreciation of facts, duplication of additions etc. The ld. AR also prayed that the assessee is suffering from financial stringencies in the business and apprehended of coercive measure from the AO to recover the demand raised by revenue authorities. In view of this factual position, we find that this is a fit case where the stay of demand can be granted subject to the payment of Rs.25 lakhs on or before 31st March,2017 and the second instalment of Rs.25 lakhs on or before 30.4.2017. Accordingly, we stay outstanding 4 SA No.159/Mum/2017 demand for a period of six months from today i.e. up to 10th Sept, 2017 or till the date of disposal of the appeal, whichever period expires earlier.
5. In view of the foregoing discussions, the appeal of the assessee is fixed on 24.4.2017 on out of turn basis. Since date of hearing is mentioned in the Stay order no separate notice fixing date of hearing will be issued to the parties. We also make it clear that the assessee should not seek adjournment on the date of hearing without any reasonable cause, failing which the present stay order may be subjected to review by the division bench hearing the appeal.
6. In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10.3.2017.
Sd sd
(महाविर स ग
िं /Mahavir Singh) (राजेश कुमार /Rajesh Kumar)
न्याययक दस्य / Judicial Member ऱेखा दस्य / Accountant Member
मुिंबई Mumbai; ददनािंक Dated : 10.3.2017
Sr.PS:SRL:
आदे श की प्रयिसऱवऩ अग्रेविि/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. गाडड फाईऱ / Guard File आदे शानु ार/ BY ORDER, True copy उऩ/ हायक ऩिंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, मुुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai