Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited, ... vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 20 July, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH "B", HYDERABAD
BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER
S.A Nos. A.Y Appellant Respondent
S.A No. 142/Hyd/2018
(in ITA No. 2010-11 Deccan Chronicle ACIT,
966/Hyd/2017) Holding Limited, Circle - 16(2),
S.A No. 143/Hyd/2018 Secunderabad. Hyderabad.
(in ITA No. 2011-12
967/Hyd/2017) PAN - AABCD6737D
S.A No. 144/Hyd/2018
(in ITA No. 2013-14
536/Hyd/2018)
S.A No. 145/Hyd/2018
(in ITA No. 2012-13
647/Hyd/2018)
Assessee by : Shri S. Rama Rao
Revenue by : Shri J. Pavitram Kumar
Date of hearing 20.07.2018
Date of pronouncement 20.07.2018
O R D E R
PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM:
Through these stay petitions the assessee requested for stay of outstanding demand for the A.Ys 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14.
2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal by its earlier order in S.A. Nos. 92 & 93/Hyd/2017 dated 30.06.2017 granted stay for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12 subject to furnishing surety to the satisfaction of the A.O. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that all the bank accounts of the assessee except bank account in Punjab National Bank were earlier attached by various Agencies of the Central Government namely CBI etc. and now Revenue attached the bank account in Punjab National 2 Bank. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that all the assets of the assessee company were under attachments. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench by order dated 19.07.2017 passed order placing moratorium on the assessee it also directed to initiate Corporate Insolvency and bankruptcy code under 15(1) and 15(2) of the Act. He further submitted that the total capital of the company is only around 300 crores, whereas demand raised in these assessements were 3,265.77 crores out of which 223.11 crores were paid and the balance outstanding is 3041.66 crores. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the demand arose on account of making additions towards cash credits. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that assessee has obtained loans from banks which is not in dispute but at the end of the relevant assessment year the assessee transferred this loan to some other entity and this loan was again brought back into books of account on the first day of the next financial year and this transaction according to the A.O is liable to be taxed u/s 68 of the IT Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) treat this transition as expenditure incurred by the assessee and was brought to tax u/s 69 of the IT Act as unexplained expenditure. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that assessee has prima-facie case on merits and therefore balance of convenience is in favour of the assessee for granting stay of outstanding demand
3. On the other hand Ld. DR opposed for grant of stay.
4. Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below The Coordinate Bench of this tribunal by its earlier order in S.A No. 92 & 93/Hyd/2017, dated 30.06.2017 granted stay observing as under:
"By these applications, assessee seeks stay of outstanding demand for the assessment years 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, pending disposal of the appeals for the reasons stated in the petition annexed to the Stay 3 Applications. As per the direction of the Bench, the assessee filed cash flow statement as well as the bank statements which are being operated at Hyderabad and Secunderabad to indicate that there is monthly revenue of a sizable amount but, because of the corresponding expenditure for running the day to day business, there is a negative cash surplus and even the bank balances are meagre to run the day to day business.
2. On merits, it was submitted that the additions made by the A.O. were confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without proper reasoning and the assessee has a strong prima facie case on merits and therefore, balance of convenience is in favour of the assessee for granting stay of collection of outstanding demand. It was also brought to our notice that in the subsequent years, though identical issues were present, no such additions 2 were made by the Assessing Officer. It was, thus, submitted that the assessee fulfils all the conditions in order to seek stay of collection of outstanding demand pending disposal of appeals. The appeals are listed for hearing on 23.10.2017.
3. As per the direction of the Bench, Ld DR called the Assessing Officer also to cross verify the submissions made by the Assessee's Representative. Assessing Officer, in turn, verified the bank account copies as well as the cash flow statements and has filed a letter dated 28.06.2017, which also indicates that the bank accounts indicate cash balance of Rs. 38.21 lakhs only. Ld DR as well as the Assessing Officer could not refute the statement of the Ld Counsel for the assessee with regard to the cash flow position.
4. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, we are of the view that this is a fit case for granting of stay of collection of outstanding demand subject to the following conditions.
(a) The assessee shall furnish surety to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer; surety in the form of fixed assets can also be considered;
(b) The assessee shall not seek adjournment on the date fixed for hearing i.e., 23.10.2017 unless there are extraordinary circumstances to the satisfaction of the Bench as otherwise, the stay granted shall automatically be vacated; and
(c) If the assessee seeks to file paper book, it shall be filed at least one week before the date of hearing, if not earlier and a copy shall be furnished to the Ld DR.
5. With these observations, we allow the Stay Applications filed by the assessee. Order pronounced accordingly in the open court on 30th June, 2017".
44.1 As submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee we see there is no much change in the circumstances of the assessee. All the assets of the assessee are already under attachment including bank accounts by various Government Agencies except bank account in Punjab National Bank which was now attached by the Income Tax Department. We are of the view that if this bank account is also attached the assessee cannot run the business, therefore, to see that the assessee conduct its day to day business operations, we direct the Revenue to lift the attachment of the bank account in Punjab National Bank. In view of our above discussion we allow the stay application filed by the assessee and the conditions in clause (b) and (c) remain same except clause (a). The Revenue Department is at liberty to attach the other properties of the assessee if any other than the bank account in Punjab National bank.
5. In the result stay petitions filed by the assessee are allowed with the above conditions.
Pronounced in the open Court on 20 th July, 2018.
Sd/- SD/-
(B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated: 20 th July, 2018
KRK
Copy to:-
1) Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd., 36, Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad -03.
2) ACIT, Circle - 16(2), Hyderabad
3) CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad.
4) Pr. CIT-4, Hyderabad.
5) The Departmental Representative, I.T.A.T., Hyderabad.
6) Guard File