Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi

Agilent Technologies (International) ... vs Acit, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon on 10 June, 2022

Author: G.S. Pannu

Bench: G.S. Pannu

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
               DELHI BENCH: 'I' NEW DELHI

       BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE PRESIDENT
                          AND
          SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER


                      S.A. No.153/Del/2022
             [Arising out of ITA No.1171/Del/2022]
                    Assessment Year: 2018-19

M/s. Agilent Technologies     Vs.   ACIT,
(International) Pvt. Ltd.,          Circle-1(1),
Plot No. CP-11, Sector-8,           Gurgaon
IMT Manesar,
Gurgaon
PAN :AADCA4115C
        (Appellant)                         (Respondent)

              Appellant by      Sh. Nishant Saini, Advocate
              Respondent by     Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR


                      Date of hearing                10.06.2022
                      Date of pronouncement          10.06.2022

                             ORDER


PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM:

Captioned application has been filed by the assessee seeking stay on recovery of outstanding demand of Rs.4,29,14,890/- pertaining to assessment year 2018-19.

2

S.A. No.153/Del/2022

AY: 2018-19

2. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted, major part of the demand arises out of transfer pricing adjustment made in respect of international transaction entered with the Associated Enterprises (AEs) relating to provision of ITES services. He submitted, in case, assessee's claim of working capital adjustment is accepted, the entire transfer pricing adjustment would go, as, the profit margin of the assessee would be within the acceptable range of the average profit margin of the comparables. He submitted, even the disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act is unsustainable as the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Tribunal. However, learned counsel submitted, the assessee is willing to pay 20% of the outstanding demand, subject to which, recovery of the balance outstanding demand may be stayed. Further, he requested for early hearing of the appeal.

3. Learned Departmental Representative submitted, in case, assessee is willing to pay 20% of the outstanding demand, the recovery of the balance demand can be stayed. As regards early hearing of the appeal, he did not express any objection to assessee's request.

3

S.A. No.153/Del/2022

AY: 2018-19

4. We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The merits of the issues arising in the appeal has to be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal. At this stage, the Bench is required to consider the prima facie case, balance of convenience and injury which may be caused to either of the parties by grant or non-grant of stay.

5. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee is willing to pay part of the demand, we direct the assessee to pay 20% of the outstanding demand of Rs.4,29,14,890/- on or before 30th June, 2022. Subject to payment of the aforesaid amount, as directed, recovery of the balance outstanding demand shall remain stayed for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of the corresponding appeal, whichever is earlier.

6. Further, accepting assessee's request, which was not opposed by learned departmental representative, we fix the hearing of the corresponding appeal on 03.08.2022 on an out of turn basis. Paper-books, if any, must be filed by the parties sufficiently ahead of the date of hearing of the appeal. Since, the date of hearing of the appeal was announced in the open court in presence of both 4 S.A. No.153/Del/2022 AY: 2018-19 the parties, there is no need for issuance of separate notice of hearing to the parties. The stay application is accordingly disposed of.

7. In the result, stay application is partly allowed, as indicated above.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10th June, 2022 Sd/- Sd/-

          (G.S. PANNU)                             (SAKTIJIT DEY)
           PRESIDENT                             JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 10th June, 2022.
RK/-
Copy forwarded to:
1.     Appellant
2.     Respondent
3.     CIT
4.     CIT(A)
5.     DR
                                                Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi