Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Magnanimous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, ... vs Ito, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad on 31 July, 2020
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Through Virtual Court] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Stay Petition No.105/Ahd/2020 IN ITA.No.53/Ahd/2019 नधा रण वष /Asstt.Year : 2015-16 Magnanimous Infrastructure P.Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2) H-1109, Titanium city Centre Ahmedabad.
Prahlad Nagar Road Satellite, Ahmedabad.
PAN : AAGCM 8590 C.
अपीलाथ / (Appellant) यथ / (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri S.N.Divetia, AR
Revenue by : Shri Dilieepkumar, Sr.DR
ु वाई क तार ख/ Date
सन of Hearing : 31/07/2020
घोषणा क तार ख / Date of Pronouncement: 31/07/2020 आदे श/O RDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT Present Stay Petition is directed at the instance of assessee for restraining the Assessing Officer to continue with the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 30.9.2015 declaring total loss of Rs.1.33 crores. An assessment order was passed under section 143(3) on 18.12.2017 whereby the AO disallowed Stay Petition No.105/Ahd/2020 2 proportionate expenses at Rs.1.51 crores. He set off the business loss and ultimately determined income at NIL. Dissatisfied with this assessment order the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) which has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 22.10.2018. Dissatisfied with the order of the CIT(A) the assessee has filed appeal before the ITAT being ITA NO.53/Ahd/2019. Appeal is pending before the Tribunal.
3. During the pendency of the appeal, the ld.AO has initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. By way of present application, the assessee is requesting to stay further proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the Act before the ld.AO.
4. During the course of hearing of the present stay application, we have confronted the ld.counsel for the assessee as to show, what is the demand ? and why the assessee has not filed any stay petition in the quantum appeal ? Without getting quantum appeal listed for out of turn hearing, how further proceedings in penalty could be stayed when such proceedings are independent proceedings ? He has appraised us with the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of General Motors, whereby Hon'ble Court held that the Tribunal has power to stay further proceedings before the ld.AO with regard to the proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We do not have any hesitation in concurring with the ld.counsel for the assessee that the Tribunal has the power; but such power has to be exercised judiciously considering independent nature of penalty proceedings as well as injury likely to be suffered by an assessee due to continuation of such proceedings. Since, the assessee has not made efforts for getting his quantum appeal heard at an early date, therefore, at this stage, we do not find any merit in this application. Stay application is dismissed at this Stay Petition No.105/Ahd/2020 3 stage. However, in future, if any necessity arises to the assessee, it will be at liberty to file a fresh application.
5. In the result, stay petition is treated to be dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Court on 31st July, 2020 at Ahmedabad.
SD/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT