Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Vodafone India Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai on 16 July, 2021
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
मुंबई पीठ "जे", मुंबई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "J", MUMBAI
ी मोद कुमार, उपा य एंव
ी वकास अव थी, याियक सद यके सम
BEFORE SHRIPRAMOD KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT AND
SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
एस.ए.सं. 117/मु/
ं 2020 इन.आ.अ.सं.1119/मु/
ं 2016 (िन.व.2011-12)
S.A. NO.117/MUM/2020 in ITA No. 1119/MUM/2016 (A.Y.2011-12)
Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd.
[formerly known as 3 Global Services Pvt. Ltd.]
Indiabulls Finance Centre, 1201, 12th Floor,
Tower-1, Senapati Bapat Road, Elphinstone (W),
Mumbai-400013.
PAN: NA ...... अपीलाथ /Appellant/Applicant
बनाम Vs.
DCIT (International Taxation) Circle-3(3)(2),
Mumbai. ............... ितवाद /Respondent
अपीलाथ ारा/ Appellant by : Ms. Fereshte Sethna &
Sh. Hasmukh Ravaria
ितवाद ारा/Respondent by : Sh. Mahesh Shah
सुनवाई क ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 16/07/2021
घोषणा क ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : 16/07/2021
आदे श/ ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, J.M:
The assessee has filed present application seeking extension of stay on recovery of outstanding demand for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12.
2. Ms. Fereshte Sethna appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the Tribunal in first Stay Application (S.A.) No. 108/Mum/2016 vide order dated 18.03.2016 stayed the recovery of outstanding demand subject to deposit of Rs. 50 crores on or before 31.03.2016. The order of Tribunal was 2 स.ए.सं. 117/मुं/2020(िन.व.2011-12) S.A. No.NO.117/MUM/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) complied and the aforesaid amount was deposited before the date specified by the Tribunal. Since, the appeal of assessee was pending for adjudication, the stay was extended from time to time. Thereafter, the Tribunal in S.A. No. 319/Mum/2019 vide order dated 04.09.2019 extended stay for a period of six months subject to further deposit of Rs. 25 crores in two equal instalments by the end of October, 2019. The assessee challenged the said order of Tribunal before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 2494/2019. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 3.12.2019 stayed further demand raised by Tribunal while disposing of assessee's Stay Application in S.A. No. 319/Mum/2019(supra). The ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the delay in hearing of appeal is not attributable to the assessee, therefore, the recovery of outstanding demand be extended in terms of Tribunal order in S.A. No. 108/Mum/2016 (supra).
3. On the other hand, Shri Mahesh Shah representing the Department vehemently opposed extension of stay. The ld. DR submitted that the stay already granted should be withdrawn as the assessee is deliberately avoiding hearing of the appeal on one pretext or the other.
4. Both sides heard. A perusal of the case file shows that the Co-ordinate Bench had granted stay on recovery of outstanding demand of Rs. 423,88,61,110/- (inclusive of interest amount Rs. 157,58,37,025/-) subject to payment of Rs. 50 crores on or before 31.03.2016. The stay was granted for a period of six months. The assessee complied with the aforesaid condition as is evident from the subsequent order of the Tribunal in S.A. No. 269/Mum/2019 dated 19.08.2016. As the appeal filed by the assessee could not be heard and was adjourned from time to time, the stay already granted was extended by the Tribunal.It would be relevant to mention here that the assessee had filed extension of stay in S.A. No. 319/Mum/2019, the co-ordinate bench vide order 3 स.ए.सं. 117/मुं/2020(िन.व.2011-12) S.A. No.NO.117/MUM/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) dated 04.09.2019 extended the stay for a period of six months subject to further deposit of Rs. 25 crores in two equal instalments of Rs. 12.50 crores each to be deposited by the end of September, 2019 and October 2019, respectively. The assessee challenged further demand of Rs. 25 crores as a condition for extension of stay before the Hon'ble High Court. The counsel for the Revenue conceded before the Hon'ble High Court that unless permitted by the Court, respondent (Department) shall not insist on the petitioner (Assessee) to deposit such amount as directed by the Tribunal. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 03.12.2019 admitted the Writ Petition and in view of concession by the by the Revenue's Counsel directed that the condition imposed by the Tribunal for further deposit of Rs. 25 crores shall not be forced. The aforesaid writ petition is still pending for final adjudication. Now, the assessee has filed present stay application seeking extension of stay. After having examined the documents on record, we are of considered view that the stay already granted to the assessee deserves to be extended for a further period of six months from today or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier.
5. The assessee shall not seek adjournment in hearing of the appeal on frivolous/unjustified grounds. In case, the assessee seeks adjournment for any reasons found to be unreasonable, the stay granted shall stand vacated forthwith.
6. The stay application is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.
Order pronounced in the open court on Friday, the16thday of July, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/-
(PRAMOD KUMAR) (VIKAS AWASTHY)
उपा य /VICE-PRESIDENT याियक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER
मुंबई/Mumbai, दनांक/Dated: 16/07/2021
4
स.ए.सं. 117/मुं/2020(िन.व.2011-12)
S.A. No.NO.117/MUM/2020 (A.Y.2011-12)
SK, PS
ितिल प अ े षतCopy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ /The Appellant ,
2. ितवाद / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयु (अ)/The CIT(A)-
4. आयकर आयु CIT
5. वभागीय ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुबंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गाड फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai