Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Global Cricket Corporation Pte Ltd, ... vs Addl Dit (It)Rg 3, Mumbai on 22 June, 2018
Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa " L " nyaayapIz maM u b a[- mao .
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "L" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND G. MANJUNATHA, AM
SA No. 319/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No. 1510/Mum/2009)
SA No. 320/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.4182/Mum/2011)
(निर्धा रण वषध / Assessment Year: 2003-04)
SA No. 321/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.2161/Mum/2014)
(निर्धा रण वषध / Assessment Year: 2005-06)
SA No. 322/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.2162/Mum/2014)
(निर्धा रण वषध / Assessment Year: 2006-07)
SA No. 323/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.8818/Mum/201 0)
(निर्धा रण वषध / Assessment Year: 2007-08)
SA No. 324/Mum/2018
(Arising out of ITA No.8743/Mum/2011)
(निर्धा रण वषध / Assessment Year: 2008-09)
M/s. Global Cricket DCIT(International
Corporation Pte Ltd., (GCC) Taxation) -2(3), Mumbai
C/o. S.R.B.C. & Associates
LLP, 14th Floor, The Ruby Vs.
Senapati Bapat Marg Tulsi
Pipe Road Dadar (W est)
Mumbai - 400 028
(Appellant) .. (Respondent)
PAN No. AABCG7951L
2
SA No. 319-324/Mum/2018
.. Shri Percy Pardiwala, AR
Assessee by
Revenue by .. Shri M.V. Rajguru, DR
Date of hearing .. 22-06-2018
Date of pronouncement .. 22-06-2018
ORDER
PER G. MANJUNATHA, AM:
These stay applications have been filed by the assessee for extension of stay already granted in SA No. 551 & 552/Mum/2017 vide order dated 22-12- 2017 for reasons stated in its stay application.
2. We have heard the rival contentions and found that originally stay was granted by the Tribunal vide its order dated 30-06-2017 and which were further extended for a period of 6 months or till disposal of these appeals, whichever is earlier on the condition that if the assessee seeks adjournment except for exceptional circumstances the stay will automatically cancelled. The learned AR for the assessee submitted that the appeals could not be heard for the reasons that the Revenue has sought adjournments on various occasions and also in two occasions the case has been adjourned by the Tribunal because of the non-functioning of the Benches' on the date fixed for hearing. Therefore, the delay in disposal of the appeals cannot be attributable to the assessee and hence, the stay may be extended for a further period of 6 months. On the other hand, the learned DR strongly opposing extension of stay application filed by the assessee, submitted that the Tribunal has already granted stay for a period of more than 365 days and further extension of stay for further 6 months will exceed the prescribed time provided under section 254(2A) of the Act, and hence, no stay can be extended.
3SA No. 319-324/Mum/2018
3. Having heard both the sides, we find that although further extension of stay will exceed the prescribed time provided under the statute, but fact remains that the appeals could not be heard because of adjournments sought by the Revenue on various occasions which cannot be attributable to the assessee. We further noticed that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd. in Writ Petition (Lodg) No. 3437 of 2015 vide order dated 16-12-2015, categorically held that if the delay in disposing off the appeal is not attributable to the assessee, then the stay can be extended beyond the prescribed time limit provided under the statute. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also by following the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Ltd. (supra), we deem it appropriate to extend the stay for a further period of 90 days or till disposal of these appeals by the Tribunal, subject to further condition that if assessee seeks adjournment, except in exceptional circumstances the stay will automatically stands withdrawn.
4. In the result, the stay applications of the assessee are disposed off in terms indicated hereinabove.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22-06-2018 Sd/- Sd/-
(MAHAVIR SINGH) (G MANJUNATHA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated: 22-06-2018
Sudip Sarkar /Sr.PS
4
SA No. 319-324/Mum/2018
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT (A), Mumbai.
4. CIT
5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. Guard file.
//True Copy// BY ORDER,
Assistant Registrar
ITAT, MUMBAI