Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, ... vs Acit, Circle-1, Warangal, Warangal on 30 March, 2017
1
S.A.Nos.33 to 37/Hyd/2017 in ITA.Nos.326 to 330/Hyd/2017
Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Hanamkonda, Warangal
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCHES "B" : HYDERABAD
BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT
AND
SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Stay Application Nos. 33 to 37/Hyd/2017
Arising out of
ITA.Nos.326 to 330/Hyd/2017
Assessment Years 2009-2010 to 2013-2014
Kakatiya Urban Development ACIT, Circle-1
Authority, Warangal-506 001. vs. Warangal.
PAN AAAJK1465B
(Appellant) (Respondent)
For Assessee : Shri S. Rama Rao
For Revenue : Smt. Mini Chandran
Date of Hearing : 30.03.2017
Date of Pronouncement : 30.03.2017
ORDER
PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. By these applications, assessee i.e., Kakatiya Urban Development Authority seeks stay of collection of outstanding demand of Rs.33,35,14,880, Rs.10,82,92,350, Rs.6,13,02,050, Rs.21,40,21,070 and Rs.6,70,76,590 (for the A.Ys. 2009-2010 to 2013-2014) pending disposal of the appeals on the ground that they have a strong prima facie case on merits and balance of convenience is in favour of granting absolute stay.
2. In this regard, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assessee, submitted that as per the provisions as stood on this date assessee is entitled to get the benefit of exemption even for the preceding 2 S.A.Nos.33 to 37/Hyd/2017 in ITA.Nos.326 to 330/Hyd/2017 Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Hanamkonda, Warangal years, if registration is granted - despite the fact that application was filed in 1st March, 2016 whereas for the years under consideration the assessments were not processed by that time i.e., by the time the application, seeking registration, was filed. He has also placed before us copies of the orders of the Tribunal (pages 9 & 10) and pages 9, 23 & 27 of the original paper book to submit that these funds belong to the State Government and they are to be utilised for a specific purpose. Under these circumstances, it was urged that assessee does not have free funds, so as to make payment of tax. In the alternative, it was submitted that if at all the Tribunal insists for some payment to be made, assessee can pay only a sum of Rs.3 crores before 31st March, 2017 since it has to obtain specific permission from the Chief Secretary and other Authorities in the hierarchy even for making payment to the Income Tax Department.
3. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand, placed reliance upon the order passed by Commissioner (Exemptions) which is dated 26.09.2016 but served upon the assessee only on 28.03.2017, to submit that as the position stands today the application seeking registration was refused by the Commissioner (Exemptions) and thus, it cannot be said that assessee has a prima facie case on merits. It was also contended that assessee has sufficient funds at its disposal and considering the peculiar facts of the case, it is not a fit case for granting absolute stay.
4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the record. On a conspectus of the matter, we are of the view that it is a fit case for granting conditional stay. Since all the appeals are already posted for hearing on 13.06.2017, we hereby direct the assessee to pay a sum of Rs.8 crores, for all the years under consideration, on or before 31st March, 2017 and subject to payment 3 S.A.Nos.33 to 37/Hyd/2017 in ITA.Nos.326 to 330/Hyd/2017 Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, Hanamkonda, Warangal thereon the balance outstanding demand is stayed. Assessee shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for hearing.
5. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order of the Commissioner (Exemptions) having been served upon the assessee on 28.03.2017 it has to file appeals against that order and the same has to be clubbed along with the present appeals and atleast on account of that factor it may take some time, as Act stipulates two months time to file appeals and to prosecute the matters.
6. No doubt, the Law permits time to file appeals within 02 months but we only advise the assessee to file appeals at the earliest so that the same can be clubbed along with the present appeals and can be taken-up together. However, if there are genuine reasons for seeking adjournment, the Bench can take a decision to extend the stay already granted. With these observations, the stay applications filed by assessee are treated as partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 30.03.2017.
Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Hyderabad, Dated 30th March, 2017 VBP/- Copy to
1. Kakatiya Urban Development Authority, H.No.6-1-240, KUDA Complex, Behind Ashoka Hotel, Hanamkonda, Warangal - 506 001.
2. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Warangal.
3. CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad.
4. Pr. CIT-3, Hyderabad.
5. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad.
6. D.R. ITAT "B" Bench, Hyderabad.
7. Guard File