Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Infinity Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit Cc 2(2), Mumbai on 16 February, 2018
आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण "I" न्यायपीठ मुंबई में ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "I" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
SA Nos. 27 to 30/Mum/2018
Arising out of ITA No. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015
Assessment Year 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10
Infinity Industries P. Ltd. DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai,
1st Floor, Haroon House, (Earlier Known as DCIT, CC-
294, Perin Nariman Street, 12, Mumbai before
Opp. RBI , Fort, v. restructuring), Mumbai
Mumbai 400001
PAN AAACI8002P
Applicant Respondent
Applicant by Ms. Pranali Dixit
Respondent by Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai,DR
Date of Hearing : 16-02-2018
Date of Pronouncement : 16-02-2018
ORDER
PER RAMIT KOCHAR,Accountant Member These four stay applications being SA no. 27/Mum/2018 arising out of 2396/Mum/2015, SA no. 28/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA no. 2397/Mum/2015, SA no. 29/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA no. 2398/Mum/2015 and SA no. 30/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA No. 2399/Mum/2015, have been filed by the assessee seeking stay of demand to the tune of Rs.1,03,18,087/-, Rs 93,64,811/-, Rs. 2,10,42,076/-, and Rs. 70,23,580/- , for assessment year's 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. The assessee's appeals for the aforesaid four assessment years have been fixed from time to time since 2016/2017 before the tribunal and have been adjourned on several SA Nos. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 Arising out of ITA No. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015 times , and several times at the request of the assessee. The assessee aforesaid four appeals are now fixed for hearing on 21.03.2018 before 'I' Bench of the tribunal. The assessee has now sought stay of the aforesaid huge demand of tax and interest aggregating to Rs. 4,77,48,554/- for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 , however no justification/basis for claiming of stay of such a huge demand of tax and interest was presented in the stay applications except making unsubstantiated claim that the assessee is facing difficult financial position . It is also observed from these stay applications that for these four years , out of total demand raised by the Revenue for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 , only Rs. 6,50,000/- has been claimed to be paid pursuant to notice of demand u/s 156 and the balance demand of taxes and interest has not been paid . It is submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee is not in a position to deposit any amount towards outstanding demand of taxes and interest. It is also claimed that the assessee's operations are suffering as its bank accounts are freezed by Revenue. The learned counsel for the assessee made alternative prayer if the dates of hearing before the tribunal are advanced from present date of hearing from 21-03-2018 , the assessee will be willing to argue the matter before the regular Bench on such date to seek end of the litigation pending with the ITAT.
2. The Ld. DR opposed the stay application.
3. We have considered rival contentions and have perused the material on record. We have observed that the assessee has filed stay applications bearing no. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA no. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015 for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 and huge amount of demand of around Rs. 4.77 crores is outstanding against the assessee and further the assessee is liable to pay interest u/s.
2SA Nos. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 Arising out of ITA No. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015 220(2). No cogent reason or justification has been given for staying such a huge demand of taxes and interest except making an unsubstantiated claim that the assessee is not in a financial position to pay outstanding demand of taxes and interest . The assessee is also not willing to deposit any further amount due towards taxes and accrued interest. Under the present circumstances, stay of outstanding demand of taxes and interest cannot be granted to the assessee and stay applications stood dismissed . However , the assessee is willing to argue the matter before the tribunal for which the next date of the hearing fixed before the 'I' Bench of tribunal is 21.03.2018 and request is made to prepone the said date of hearing as it is claimed that the assessee is suffering due to bank accounts being frozen by the Revenue which is effecting operations. Under these circumstances , we are willing to grant pre ponement of the date of hearing in respect of all the four appeals in ITA no. 2396- 2399/Mum/2015 for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 before the tribunal . However , on being asked Ld. Counsel for the assessee has expressed her inability to argue the matter before 1st week of March, 2018, because of her commitment outside Mumbai. Under the present circumstances we are granting preponment of the hearing of all the four appeals in ITA no. 2396-2399/Mum/2015 for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 before the 'I' bench of the tribunal on 05.03.2018. The said date of hearing was announced in the open court in the presence of learned counsel for the assessee and departmental representative and both have noted the same for which separate notice shall not now be issued. However, all the four stay of demand applications filed by the assessee in SA No. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA no. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015 for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 are dismissed. We order accordingly.
3SA Nos. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 Arising out of ITA No. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015
4. All the four stay applications filed by the assessee in SA No. 27 to 30/Mum/2018 arising out of ITA no. 2396 to 2399/Mum/2015 for AY 2006-07 to 2009-10 are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16.02.2018 आदे श की घोषणा खल ु े न्यायालय में ददनाांकः 16 .02.2018 को की गई ।
Sd/- Sd/-
(JOGINDER SINGH ) (RAMIT KOCHAR)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai, dated: 16 .02.2018
copy to...
Nishant Verma
Sr. Private Secretary
1. The appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT(A) - Concerned, Mumbai
4. The CIT- Concerned, Mumbai
5. The DR Bench,
6. Master File
// Tue copy//
BY ORDER
DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR
ITAT, MUMBAI
4