Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Powerloom Developement & Export ... vs Ito (E)Ii(1), on 24 March, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES "C", MUMBAI
Before S/Shri G S Pannu, AM, & Saktijit Dey, JM
S A No.175 /Mum/2017
(Arising out ITA No.2869/Mum/2016
Assessment Year 2011-12)
Power Loom Development & ITO Exemption 11(1)
Export Promotion Council Mumbai
GC-2, Ground Floor, Vs.
Gundecha Onclave,
Kherani Road, Sakinaka
Andheri (East),
Mumbai - 400 072
PAN : AAATP0271E
(Applicant) (Respondent)
Applicant By : Shri S L Jain
Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal (Sr DR)
Date of Hearing :24.03.2017 Date of Pronouncement :24.03.2017
ORDER
Per Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member:
By this stay application, assessee seeks stay realization of outstanding demand of Rs.10,78,200/- for A.Y. 2011-12.
2. The learned AR submitted that the assessee, a charitable institution, is eligible for exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He submitted, in the earlier assessment years also the department has allowed assessee's claim of exemption u/s. 11 . However, in the impugned assessment year, the department has taken a view that since the assessee is governed under the 2 SA No175 /Mum/2017 Power Loom Development & Export Promotion Council principle of mutuality all income derived from persons other than members are to be treated as income of the assessee and assessed to tax. The learned AR relying upon certain judicial precedents submitted that even assuming that the assessee is governed under the principle of mutuality however, there is no prohibition that principle of mutuality and benefit u/s. 11 of the Act cannot be claimed simultaneously. The learned AR submitted that in any case of the matter, assesse has paid an amount of Rs.10,80,000/- out of the total demand of Rs.21,58,200/- including the interest component of Rs.5,71,284/-. Therefore, recovery of the balance outstanding demand should be stayed.
3. The learned DR opposed grant of obsolete stay.
4. Having considered the submissions of the parties, perused the material on record and having examined prima facie case and balance of convenience and also considering the fact that assessee has paid more than 50% of the demand raised, we are inclined to stay recovery of the balance outstanding demand for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till disposal of the corresponding appeal of the assessee, whichever is earlier. We also direct the Registry to fix the corresponding appeal of the assessee for hearing on out of turn basis on 01.05.2017. Since the date of hearing of appeal was pronounced in the open court in the presence of learned counsels for both the parties, issuance of hearing notice is hereby dispensed with. We make it 3 SA No175 /Mum/2017 Power Loom Development & Export Promotion Council clear, that the parties should not take any unnecessary adjournment unless there are compelling circumstances.
3. In the result, the stay application is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 24th day of March 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(G S Pannu) (Saktijit Dey)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai; Dated : 24th March 2017
SA
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Applicant.
2. The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A), Mumbai.
4. The CIT
5. DR, 'C' Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
BY ORDER,
//True Copy//
(Assistant Registrar)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai