Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Neueon Towers Limited (Formerly Known ... vs Dcit, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad, ... on 2 June, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCHES "B & A" : HYDERABAD
BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI K. NARSIMHA CHARRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Stay Application Nos. 86 & 87/Hyd/2017
(Arising out of ITA Nos. 335/Hyd/17 & 1682/Hyd/16)
Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13
M/s. Neueon Towers Limited, The DCIT,
(Formerly known as Sujana Vs. Circle-3(2),
Towers Limited), HYDERABAD
HYDERABAD
[PAN: AAKCS7820F]
[Applicant] [Respondent]
For Assessee : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, AR
For Revenue : Shri V. Sreekar, DR
Date of Hearing : 02-06-2017
Date of Pronouncement : 02-06-2017
ORDER
PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. :
These two Stay Application are filed by assessee for AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13, wherein substantial demands were raised by the Revenue.
2. It was submitted that issue in AY. 2011-12 is with reference to estimation of income at 1% of the turnover, the issue of which was not accepted by the ITAT in assessee's own case in earlier year and Assessing Officer (AO) has accepted the books of account in that year. Since facts are similar, it was submitted that assessee has prima-facie case in its favour.
SA. Nos. 86 & 87/Hyd/2017 :- 2 -:
3. For AY. 2012-13, the issue is with reference to not giving credit of the MAT tax paid for the AY. 2010-11. If the MAT tax credit was given, assessee would not be paying any tax and accordingly, has prima-facie case in its favour. It was also submitted that assessee would be entitled to refunds also in earlier years and if proper action is taken by AO, there will be no outstanding demand.
4. Ld.DR, however, relied on the orders of the authorities to submit that AO has not given the factual position of tax refunds and outstanding demands. He wanted further time to make submissions.
5. Having considered the rival contentions and fact that AO took coercive steps by attaching the bank accounts, without even examining the past record, we are of the opinion that assessee deserves stay of the demand. Considering that appeals are coming up for hearing in the months of June and July, we are of the opinion that the outstanding demands can be stayed for a period of three months or till the disposal of appeals, whichever is earlier. In the meantime, AO is directed to examine the past record and if any refunds are due to assessee, he can make adjustments after giving due notice to the assessee. With these directions, both the Stay Applications are considered allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd June, 2017 upon conclusion of hearing Sd/- Sd/-
(K. NARSIMHA CHARRY) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated 2nd June, 2017
TNMM
SA. Nos. 86 & 87/Hyd/2017
:- 3 -:
Copy to :
1. M/s. Neueon Towers Limited (Formerly known as Sujana Towers Limited), Plot No. 41, Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, Hyderabad.
2. The DCIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad.
3. CIT(Appeals)-3 , Hyderabad
4. The Pr.CIT-3, Hyderabad
5. D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad.
6. Guard File.