| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1252 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 220
Where assessee did have a prima facie case and balance of convenience was in its favour for extension of stay since there was no change in the facts and circumstances from the stay extended earlier till today and the delay in non-disposal of appeal was not attributable to assessee, therefore stay of realization of outstanding demand was extended for a further period of six months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier.
|
Recovery of tax - Stay of demand - Extension of stay on realization of outstanding demand -
Assessee, through this Stay Application, pleaded the Tribunal to extend the stay on realization of outstanding demand which was granted earlier by Tribunal. Assessee submitted that Tribunal stayed the realization of outstanding demand for a period of six months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever was earlier. Subsequently, Tribunal extended the stay on realization of outstanding demand for a further period of six months or till the date of passing of the order whichever is earlier. He submitted that there was no change in the facts from the stay extended earlier till today. He submitted that the hearing could not take place since the issues involved have been referred to a larger Special Bench which was still pending. Held: Assessee did have a prima facie case and balance of convenience was in its favour for extension of stay since there was no change in the facts and circumstances from the stay extended earlier till today and the delay in non-disposal of the appeal is not attributable to assessee. Further, Tribunal, in assessee's own case in the earlier year, had decided both the issues in favour of assessee and one of issues i.e., disallowance of supplementary rent stands decided in favour of assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of case, stay of realization of outstanding demand was extended for a further period of six months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier. Stay Application filed by assessee was accordingly allowed
REFERRED : Pr.CITv. Interglobe Aviation Ltd. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 4984 (Del-HC) Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd.&Ors. v. Asstt. CIT &Anr. (2015) 376 ITR 87 (Del) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 2304 (Del-HC) Interglobe Aviation Ltd. v. ACIT [Stay application No. 635/DEL/2018, Arising out of ITA No.:- 3224/Del /2017, dt. 14-9-2018] InterGlobe Aviation Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [Stay Application No.691/Del./2017 Arising out of ITA.No.3224/Del./2017, dt. 12-3-2018] Reuters India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2004) 3 SOT 886 (Del) : 2004 TaxPub(DT) 1631 (Del-Trib)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favor
A.Y. : 2012-13
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|