Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Samir Kishor Parekh, Ahmedabad vs The Acit Circle-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad on 7 October, 2021
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'D' अहमदाबाद ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "D" BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Stay Petition Nos. 40&41/Ahd/2021-AY 2008-09&2010-11 ( in I.T.A. No. 265/Ahd/2020 & 266/Ahd/2020) Samir Kishor Parekh बनाम/ ACIT Prop. of M/s. Shree Krishna Circle-5(3)(2) Vs. Industries, 46, Mithila Ahmedabad Society Ahmedabad Nr.
Shreyas Crossing, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : AFVPP7637 L (अपीलाथ /Appellant) .. ( यथ / Respondent) अपीलाथ ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Chintan Shah, AR यथ क ओर से / Respondent by : Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. D.R. सन ु वाई क तार ख / Date of Hearing 07/10/2021 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement 07/10/2021 आदे श/O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:
S.P. No. 40/Ahd/2021(A.Y. 2008-09):-
The instant stay application has been filed by the assessee praying for stay of the outstanding demand of Rs. 7,05,870/- raised by the Revenue. In fact, the total demand raised by the Revenue was of Rs. 40,47,282/- out of which Rs. 33,41,413/- was also paid by the appellant. Since 72% of the entire demand has also been paid by the assessee the assessee prays for stay of recovery of the remaining demand of Rs. 7,05,870/-.
S . P . N o s . 4 0 & 4 1 / Ah d / 2 1 A. Y . 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 & 2 0 1 0 - 1 1 - 2 -
2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of ceramic glazed tiles and regularly assessed. Additions were never made either in scrutiny assessment or otherwise as submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee.
3. He further has submitted before us that there is a strong arguable case on merits and reasonable chances to succeed. The Ld. Counsel further contended that the Income Tax Officer on 31.10.2018 has put lien on assessee's C.C bank account up to the amount of Rs. 93,94,087/- in Central Bank of India wherein currently Rs. 13,68,074.69 balance is lien marked. The assessee is having financial crisis and, therefore, prays for lifting of such lien on assessee's account in order to enable it to run the business smoothly.
4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR vehemently oppose the stay of recovery of balance demand.
Further that on the point of lifting of lien on assessee's account by the Revenue, the Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has not moved any application before the authorities below with such prayer.
5. Having heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the assessee has a prima facie arguable case in appeals and balance of convenience is in favour of the assessee. We have further considered the fact of making payment of 72% of the entire demand by the assessee. Thus, considering the totality of the matter we stay the recovery of balance demand raised by the Revenue for a period of six months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier.
Apart from that we have further considered the argument advanced by the assessee in support of his prayer of lifting the lien on assessee's bank account lying with Central Bank of India. Since the assessee has already paid a lump sum amount to demand raised by the Revenue we do not find any reason to S . P . N o s . 4 0 & 4 1 / Ah d / 2 1 A. Y . 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 & 2 0 1 0 - 1 1 - 3 -
allow the department to continue with the lien on assessee's cash credit account lying with Central Bank of India where Rs. 13,68,074.69/- balance is lien marked. Such amount would certainly help the assessee to run the business smoothly. We, therefore, direct the Income Tax Officer to lift the lien on the said account. The said application is, thus, allowed with the aforesaid terms and conditions.
Stay Petition No. 41/Ahd/2021 (A.Y. 2010-11):-
6. In this particular case the total demand of Rs. 16,00,537/- was raised by the Revenue against which the assessee has paid Rs. 7,39,817/-. The assessee prays for granting stay against the said demand of Rs. 8,60,720/- till the disposal of the matter by us. Thus, keeping in view the identical facts as placed by the assessee, the order passed by us granting stay of recovery of the outstanding demand raised against the assessee in respect of the S.P. 41/Ahd/2021 we stay the recovery of the balance demand for a period of six months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier. The stay application is hereby allowed.
7. In the combined result, both the Stay Petitions filed by the assessee are allowed.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 07/10/2021
Sd/- Sd/-
(PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (MADHUMITA ROY)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad: Dated 07/10/2021 True Copy
TANMAY, SR. PS TRUE COPY
S . P . N o s . 4 0 & 4 1 / Ah d / 2 1
A. Y . 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 & 2 0 1 0 - 1 1 - 4 -
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. राज व / Revenue
2. आवेदक / Assessee
3. संबं'धत आयकर आय)
ु त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आयु)त- अपील / CIT (A)
5. *वभागीय -त-न'ध, आयकर अपील य अ'धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड1 फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदे श से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील य अ'धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।
1 .Da te o f d ic tat io n on 0 7 .1 0 .2 0 2 1 2 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e t yp ed d r a ft i s p lac ed b e fo r e t he Dic ta ti n g Me mb er 0 7 .1 0 .2 0 2 1 3 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e ap p r o ved d r a f t co me s to t he Sr .P . S./P . S. 4 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fa ir o r d er i s p lac ed b e fo r e t he D ict at i n g M e mb er fo r p r o no u nce me n t .0 8 . 2 0 2 1 5 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fa ir o r d er co me s b ac k to t he Sr .P . S./P . S 6 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fi le go es to t he B e n c h Cl er k 0 7 .1 0 .2 0 2 1 7 .Da te o n wh i c h t h e fi le go es to t he Head C ler k ...... ... .... 8 .T he d a te o n wh i c h t h e f il e go e s to t he As st t. R eg i str a r fo r si g n at ur e o n t he o r d er ...... ... ...... ... ... ...
9 .Da te o f De sp a tc h o f t h e Or d e r ... ... ...