Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore
M/S Fosroc Chemicals I P Ltd, Bangalore vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 3 March, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'A' BENCH, BANGALORE
BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
[SP No. 23/B/2017
(in IT(TP)A No.279/B/2017)]
(Assessment year: 2012-13)
M/s. Fosroc Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant
PSRID No. 38, 12th Cross, 3rd Floor, Commissioner of Income
CBI Road, Ganganagar North, Tax (LTU),
Bengaluru - 560 032. Circle-1,
PAN:AAABCB5293N Bengaluru.
Applicant Respondent
Applicant by : Shri.Ramasubramaniyan, CA
Revenue by : Smt. Swapna Das,JCIT
Date of hearing : 03/03/2017
Date of pronouncement : 03/03/2017
O R D E R
Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, JM :
This stay petition is preferred by the assessee in IT(TP)A No. 279/B/2017 with the submission that the tax demand of Rs.6,45,97,237/- be stayed till the disposal of the appeal.
2. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee has contended that the demand was raised on account of transfer pricing adjustment and the issues involved in the appeals are squarely covered by the orders of the Tribunal in the [SP No. 23/B/2017 (in IT(TP)A No.279/B/2017)] Page 2 of 4 assessee's own case. Since the assessee has good primafacie case in his favour, the outstanding demand be stayed. He however has agreed to make some part payment against the outstanding demand.
3. The learned DR strongly opposed the contentions of the assessee with the submission that the stay can only be granted if the assessee's financial position is bad. The arguments of the assessee that the issues are covered in his favour are the arguments on merit can only be dealt while disposing the appeal and not in the stay application. Therefore there is no good primafacie in his favour.
4. Having carefully examined the stay petitions in the light of the rival submissions, we find that the adjudication of the issues on merit can only be done while disposing the appeal. Nothing has been placed before us on the financial constraint of the assessee. We are however of the view that the stay can only be granted subject to payment of certain outstanding demands. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 1 crore out of the outstanding tax demand of Rs. 4,24,02,489/-. We accordingly direct the revenue not to enforce the recovery of the outstanding demand till the disposal of the appeal or upto 6 months from the [SP No. 23/B/2017 (in IT(TP)A No.279/B/2017)] Page 3 of 4 date of this order, whichever is earlier, subject to payment of Rs.1 Crore to be paid by 31.03.2017. Since we have granted stay, we grant earlier hearing to the assessee and direct the Registry to fix the next hearing on 11.04.2017. We however make it clear at this stage that the assessee would not seek any adjournment on the date fixed. He may file the relevant evidence before the date of hearing. If adjournment is sought by the assessee, the stay granted would automatically be withdrawn. Accordingly, the stay petition is disposed off.
5. In the result, the stay application of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 03rd March, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S. JAYARAMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Place : Bangalore
Dated : 03/03/2017
/NS/
[SP No. 23/B/2017
(in IT(TP)A No.279/B/2017)]
Page 4 of 4
Copy to :
1 Appellant
2 Respondent
3 CIT(A)-II Bangalore
4 CIT
5 DR, ITAT, Bangalore.
6 Guard file
By order
Assistant Registrar
Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
Bangalore