Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Krishna Enterprises, Chennai vs Acit, Chennai on 10 August, 2018
आयकर अपील य अ
धकरण, 'बी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' BENCH : CHENNAI
ी अ ाहम पी. जॉज , लेखा सद य एवं
ी ध$ु व%
ु आर.एल रे &डी, या)यक सद य के सम+ ।
[BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER]
S.P.No.221/CHNY/2018
(in आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1885/CHNY/2016)
नधा रण वष /Assessment year : 2009-2010.
M/s. Krishna Enterprises, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of
No.14/28, Punarpoosam Income Tax,
Apartments, Non Corporate Circle 1(1)
Thirumuthry Street, Chennai.
T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017.
[PAN AAIFK 0698N]
(Petitioner) (-.यथ0/Respondent)
Petitioner by : Shri. S. Sendamarai Kannan,
CCIT (Retd)
Respondent by : Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
सन
ु वाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 10-08-2018
घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 10-08-2018
आदे श / O R D E R
PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
In this stay petition filed by the assessee, it pleads for stay of recovery of outstanding demand of @2,75,26,990/-, out of the total outstanding demand of @3,54,82,440/-.
2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that total tax and interest demand for the impugned assessment year came to :- 2 -: SP No.221 /2018 @4,01,91,328/-, of which a sum of @47,08,889/- was adjusted against tax deductions at source. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the whole of the demand stood disputed.
3. Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that assessee was doing business of land aggregation and had filed returns for assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-2013 showing total profit of @21,40,85,986/- and had paid tax of @6,22,69,047/- on such admitted income. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, there was a survey conducted u/s.133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ''the Act'') in the premises of the assessee on 17th and 18th December, 2013 and survey officials had forcibly obtained a declaration from its Managing Partner to show extra profit of @11.23 crores, which was unearned. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, Managing Director has retracted the above through a letter dated 03.02.2014 and thereafter assessments were completed for the five years computing total profit at @31,56,53,688/-. Submission of the ld. Authorised Representative was that on assessee's appeal, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had computed profits at @25,96,50,784/- and assessee was in appeal on the additions/disallowances made by the lower authorities.
:- 3 -: SP No.221 /2018
4. Continuing his submissions, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the case was heard by this Tribunal on 17th, 18th May and 9th June, 2017 but the Bench did not pass an order. Thereafter as per the ld. Authorised Representative, case was again posted for hearing on 15th, 22nd September and 6th October, 2017. However, as per the ld. Authorised Representative, the case was released by the Tribunal. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, appeal were posted number of times and the case were delayed for no fault of the assessee. In the meanwhile, as per the ld. Authorised Representative, ld. Assessing Officer had issued an order for the impugned assessment year giving effect to the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and through this order a demand of @3,54,82,000/- has been raised by the ld. Assessing Officer. Contention of the ld. Authorised Representative was that assessee would be put to irreparable damage and loss if Department persisted with the demand and recovery. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, assessee was in great financial hardship and appeal of the assessee was remaining pending for no fault of the assessee. Ld. Authorised Representative also stated that assessee having strong prime facie case since according to him, additions for compensation, suppression of stock, accrual of cash were all based on surmises. :- 4 -: SP No.221 /2018
5. Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand submitted that assessee could not show any good reason for grant of a stay.
6. We have heard both the parties, perused the orders of lower authorities and stay petition filed by the assessee. Touch stone on which a stay application is to be decided are balance of convenience and demonstration of irreparable damage and financial difficulties. Assessee admittedly is a land aggregator and had earned substantial profits during assessment years from 2009-10 to 2012-2013. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had given a finding that land cost adopted by the ld. Assessing Officer was incorrect. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had computed figures for each of 531 properties purchased by the assessee from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2011. Argument of the assessee was that compensation shown in the statement of profitability was paid to the land owners for growing crops and this was rejected by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the simple reason that growing crops valued at @3,10,44,000/- could not have been allowed to rot by any prudent person. Viz-a-viz suppression of closing stock there is a clear finding by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that there were omissions by the assessee in computing the stock value. Viz-a-viz, disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, there is a clear finding by :- 5 -: SP No.221 /2018 the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that many of the cash payments were huge and not below @20,000/-, That apart, we also find that assessee has not been able to demonstrate any great financial difficulty faced by. Just because the Tribunal could not hear the case on earlier dates fixed for hearing, would not mean that assessee can claim a stay as a matter of right. We thus do not find any good ground for granting a stay.
7. In the result, the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on Friday, the 10th day of August, 2018, at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(ध$ु व%
ु आर.एल रे &डी) (अ ाहम पी. जॉज )
(DUVVURU RL REDDY) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE)
या)यक सद य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
चे नई/Chennai
दनांक/Dated:10th August, 2018.
KV
आदे श क " त#ल$प अ%े$षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ'/Appellant 3. आयकर आय(
ु त (अपील)/CIT(A) 5. $वभागीय " त न-ध/DR
2. ".यथ'/Respondent 4. आयकर आय(
ु त/CIT 6. गाड फाईल/GF