Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata
Shri Prabhu Shankar Agarwal, Kolkata vs Dcit, Central Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, ... on 4 May, 2018
1
SA No. 56/Kol/2018
Prabhu Shankar Agarwal, Block period 01.04.1995 to 24.09.2001
आयकर अपील
य अधीकरण, यायपीठ - "B" कोलकाता,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH: KOLKATA
(सम ) ी ऐ. ट
. वक , यायीक सद य एवं डॉ. अजन
ु$ लाल सैनी, लेखा सद य)
[Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM]
SA No.56/Kol/2018
In I.T.(SS).A. No.10/Kol/2018
Block Assessment Years: 01.04.1995 to 24.09.2001
Prabhu Shankar Agarwal Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,
(PAN: ADEPA4448F) Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata.
Applicant Respondent
Date of Hearing 04.05.2018
Date of Pronouncement 04.05.2018
For the Applicant Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate
For the Respondent Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
ORDER
Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM
The assessee has preferred this stay application against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)- 21, Kolkata dated 02.02.2018 for block period from 01.04.1995 to 24.09.2001.
2. At the outset itself, Ld. Sr. counsel Shri Surana drew our attention to the fact that the total tax demand is to the tune of Rs.3,17,96,578/- out of which the assessee has already made payment of Rs.87,84,759/- which according to the Ld. Counsel comes to 30% of the demand. The Ld. Sr. Counsel drew our attention to the fact that the major addition made in this case is for the jewellery found during search. According to the Ld. Counsel, this jewellery is less than what has been disclosed by the assessee in the earlier years by way of wealth tax return. So, therefore, no addition was warranted. Likewise, Ld. Counsel urged before the Tribunal that the cash found can be explained because cash found during search belonged to M/s. Rameswara Nursing Home Pvt. Ltd., a company of which the assessee was one of the Directors. However, according to Ld. Counsel, these facts were not 2 SA No. 56/Kol/2018 Prabhu Shankar Agarwal, Block period 01.04.1995 to 24.09.2001 considered in the right perspective by the authorities below and, therefore, these additions cannot be justified. According to Ld. Counsel, if these additions are knocked off, the demand of tax will be negligible. Further, the Ld. Counsel brought to our notice that the department has attached the bank account of the assessee which is creating financial constraints for the assessee to run his business. Therefore, he prays for stay of the outstanding demand. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently opposing the stay argued that this is a case where evidence has to be evaluated and by simple submissions made by the Ld. AR before this Tribunal cannot be a ground to grant any blanket stay to the assessee. Ld. Sr. DR also submitted that in any case even if stay is granted then 80% of the outstanding demand should be paid by the assessee.
3. We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We note that the facts stated in respect of the tax demand as well as the amount which has been remitted by the assessee is not disputed. However, we note that the major addition has been made on the basis of jewellery and cash found which the assessee states can be explainable with evidence as explained above. Though we note that the assessee has been able to make out a prima facie case, taking into consideration the argument of Ld. DR on behalf of the revenue, we are inclined to grant stay provided the assessee remits Rs. 20 lacs within a period of two weeks from today and incase the assessee remits the amount within two weeks there will be stay for the outstanding demand for six months or appeal is decided, whichever is early. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment without just cause. With the aforesaid observation and direction, we fix the case out of turn on 07.06.2018. As the date is announced in the open court no separate notice is required to be served.
5. In the result, the Stay Application of assessee is allowed on the terms as stated above.
Order is pronounced in the open court.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Dr. A. L. Saini) (Aby. T. Varkey)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated : 4th May, 2018
Jd.(Sr.P.S.)
3
SA No. 56/Kol/2018
Prabhu Shankar Agarwal, Block period 01.04.1995 to 24.09.2001 Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant - Shri Prabhu Shankar Agarwal, P-420, Kazi Nazrul Islam Sarani, VIP Main road, Kolkata-700 052. 2 Respondent - DCIT Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata.
3. The CIT(A) Kolkata
4. CIT Kolkata
5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata.
/True Copy, By order,
Sr. Pvt. Secretary