Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Manoj Narayan Shetty, Thane vs Ito Ward 2 (5), Thane on 4 March, 2020
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES "D", MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (VP) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)
SA No. 106/MUM/2020
Arising out of ITA No. 47/MUM/2020)
Assessment Year: 2015-16
Manoj Narayan Shetty, The Income Tax Officer,
1601, Building No. 1 (K/24), Ward 2 (5),
Highland Park, Kolshet Road, Thane
Off G.B. Road, Vs.
Thane - 400607
PAN : ANMPS0248P
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Deepak Raje (AR)
Revenue by : Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (DR)
Date of Hearing: 28/02/2020
Date of Pronouncement: 04/03/2020
आदे श / O R D E R
PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM
The applicant/appellant has filed the present application for grant of stay on recovery of demand, raised by the AO amounting to Rs. 44,96,810/- (including interest component) on the basis of impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) pertaining to the assessment year 2015-16.
2. In this case, the AO passed assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act (for short 'the Act) determining total income of Rs. 1,17,02,210/- against the declared income at Rs. 9,56,250/- after making addition of Rs. 1,07,45,963/- on the ground that the assessee has failed to disclose the contract receipts as the assessee had shown the same as Rs. 97,76,340/- in its return of income whereas in the computation sheet the assessee has shown the same as Rs. 2,05,22,303/-. The Ld. CIT (A) upheld the assessment order in 2 SA No. 106/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 the first appeal. The assessee has challenged the impugned order before the Tribunal which is yet to be heard and disposed of.
4. In the light of the aforesaid facts, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that out of the total demand the assessee has already paid an amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- The Ld. counsel further contended that the order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is apparently incorrect and contrary to the evidence on record. The Ld. counsel further submitted that since the assessee has a prima facie strong case in its favour, stay order may be passed and the department may be restrained from taking any coercive action for recovery of the outstanding demand. The Ld. counsel also submitted that the appeal may be fixed for early hearing on out of turn basis.
5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not controvert the submissions made by the Ld. counsel, however, opposed the application moved by the applicant/assessee.
6. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the relevant material on record in the light of the contentions of the parties. We notice that the assessee has challenged the impugned order basically on the ground that the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly confirmed the addition without appreciating the merits of the case that the AO had made addition of the entire gross receipts as income instead of taking the net profit there from. As contended by the Ld. counsel, the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) are not based on the evidence on record. The assessee has already paid Rs. 17,00,000/-. The facts and the circumstances of the case suggest that the assessee has a prima facie case in its favour. In our considered view, no prejudice is going to be caused to the revenue in case this application is allowed. Hence, we are of the considered view, this is a fit case for granting stay on recovery of outstanding demand.
7. We accordingly allow the application for granting stay on recovery of outstanding demand for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the date of order of the Tribunal in assessee's appeals whichever is earlier. We 3 SA No. 106/MUM/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 further allow the request of the assessee for early hearing the appeal and the direct the Registry to post the case for hearing on 26.03.2020.
In the result, application for grant of stay of demand filed by the applicant/assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 4th March, 2020 Sd/- Sd/-
(PRAMOD KUMAR) (RAM LAL NEGI)
VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER
मुंबई Mumbai; दिन ुं क Dated 04/03/2020
Alindra, PS
आदे श प्रतितिति अग्रे तिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-
4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT
5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, मुुं बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
आदे शानु सार/ BY ORDER, सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// उि/सहायक िं जीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुुं बई / ITAT, Mumbai