Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Procter & Gamble Hygiene And Health Care ... vs Dcit Rg 10(3)(2), Mumbai on 6 October, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "K", MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
S.A.NO.433/MUM/2017
(ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1366/MUM/2017 (A.Y:2012-13))
Procter & Gamble Hygiene and v. DCIT 10(3)(2)
Healthcare Limited, Mumbai
495, P&G Plaza, Cardinal Gracious
Road, Chakala, Andheri (East)
Mumbai -400 099
PAN: AAACP 6332 M
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri Haresh Buch
Revenue by : Shri Moksha Mehta
Date of Hearing : 06.10.2017
Date of Pronouncement : 06.10.2017
ORDER
PER C.N. PRASAD (JM)
1. Through this Stay Application assessee requested for extension of stay of outstanding demand of ₹.18,60,73,930/- out of total demand of ₹.28,60,73,930/- for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
2. The Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that in this case stay was earlier granted in S.A.No.173/Mum/2017 dated 30.03.2017 subject to payment of ₹.10 Crores i.e. ₹.5 Crores each by 31 March, 2017 and 30 April, 2017. The Learned Counsel for the assessee further submits that the directions of the Tribunal were complied with and assessee paid 2 S.A.NO.433/MUM/2017 Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Healthcare Limited ₹.10 Crores out of outstanding demand of ₹.28,60,73,930/- as per the directions given in the stay order. The present outstanding demand after payment of said ₹.10 Crores is ₹.18,60,73,930/-. The counsel for the assessee further referring to Page No.14 of the Stay Application Para 5.5 submits that the appeal could not be heard for the reason that on three occasions Revenue sought adjournment and on one occasion Bench did not function and on one occasion matter was adjourned as per the cause list and in one of the occasion the matter was passed over and finally it was adjourned. Therefore, Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that since the matter got adjournment at the instance of the Department or Bench did not function and since there is no fault on the part of the assessee the stay may be extended till the appeal is disposed off by the Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the assessee submits that appeal now stands posted for hearing on 21st November, 2017.
3. Ld.DR opposed for granting stay.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the order of this Tribunal in S.A.No.173/Mum/2013 dated 30.03.2017 the Coordinate Bench granted stay of outstanding demand for a period of 180 days from the date of order or disposal of appeal whichever is earlier subject to payment of ₹.10 Crores i.e. ₹.5 Crores each by 31 March, 2017 and 30 April, 2017 observing as under: -
3
S.A.NO.433/MUM/2017 Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Healthcare Limited "3. We have gone through the totality facts and circumstances of the case and fid that various issues are claimed to be covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Tribunal passed in group company of the assessee namely Gillette India Limited Vs. ACIT 175 TTJ 35 (Jaipur). For remaining issues, the assessee has fairly proposed to deposit lump-sum amount of ₹.10 Crores. We have gone through the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and find that proposal made by the Ld. Counsel is quite fair. Therefore, we accept the proposal and direct the assessee to pay a sum of ₹.5 Crores by 31st March, 2017 and balances amount of ₹.5 Crores by 30 April, 2017. The balance amount of demand is hereby stayed for the period of 180 days from the date of this order or disposal of main appeal, whichever is earlier. The AO shall not take any coercive measures during operation of our stay order. In case assessee seeks adjournments without any cogent reason, our stay order shall stand vacated. The assessee is also directed to submit the evidence of payment of aforesaid amounts to the AO, as and when paid. The stay petition is allowed subject to our directions as above. It is clarified that our stay order shall not have any bearing on merits of the case."
5. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the assessee that assessee has complied with the directions of the Tribunal and the Revenue could not controvert submissions of the Learned Counsel for the assessee. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the assessee that the appeal could not be heard for the following reasons: -
Date of Hearing Reason for adjournment
April, 03, 2017 Following a Passover, adjourned by the
Bench to May 11, 2017
May 11, 2017 BNF, case adjourned to May 18, 2017
May 18, 2017 Adjournment sought by DR. case adjourned
to August 2, 2017
August 2, 2017 Adjournment sought by DR. case adjourned
to September 20, 2017
4
S.A.NO.433/MUM/2017
Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Healthcare Limited Date of Hearing Reason for adjournment September 20, 2017 Adjournment sought by DR. case adjourned to September 26, 2017 September 26, 2017 Case adjourned to November 21, 2017 as per cause list.
6. We have also verified the order sheet noting's of the appeal file and find that the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the assessee are true. In the circumstances, we hold that since there is no fault on the part of the assessee and as the appeal could not be heard for the reason that either Revenue sought time or Bench did not function etc., the assessee could not be find fault with. Thus, we are inclined to extend stay of recovery of outstanding demand of ₹.18,60,73,930/- till 31st January, 2018 or disposal of appeal whichever is earlier. We make it clear that if the assessee seeks time without any sufficient and reasonable cause the stay granted by this order gets automatically vacated and the Revenue is at liberty to recover the outstanding demand. Stay petition is disposed off accordingly.
7. In the result, stay application is allowed as indicated above.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 06th October, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(R.C. SHARMA) (C.N. PRASAD)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai / Dated 06/10/2017
VSSGB, SPS
5
S.A.NO.433/MUM/2017
Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Healthcare Limited 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, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mum