Chennai Contianer Terminal P.Ltd , vs Assessee
- CitationITA No.1107/Mum/2015
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal, on a stay application against an outstanding demand, may grant partial stay of the demand, conditional on the assessee paying a part of the demand within a fixed time, where on a prima facie consideration of the issues the balance of convenience favours the assessee; the stay of the balance is then limited to a fixed period or until the disposal of the appeal, whichever is earlier, and the appeal is to be heard on priority with the assessee restrained from seeking adjournments except on bona fide and genuine grounds.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Applicant by Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Megha Bansal Respondent by Shri Sachchidanand Dube (DR)
Date of Hearing : 13-03-2015 Date of Pronouncement : 13-03-2015
ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.
By way of this Stay Application, the assessee seeks for stay of outstanding demand of Rs. 9,69,66,285/-.
2. Before us the learned counsel, Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Megha Bansal submitted that out of the total demand of Rs.30,13,99,877/-, most of the demand had been paid and only Rs.9.69 crores is outstanding. The assessee company is mainly engaged in the business of managing, developing and maintaining 2 SA No.55/Mum/2015
the container terminal at Bharti Dock at Chennai Port Trust, and most of the additions which have been made by the AO, in pursuance of DRP direction are by and large covered in favour of the assessee. The ld. counsel furnished a chart of the issues involved and also made out the prima facie case as to how most of the additions are unsustainable. Therefore, he submitted that the outstanding demand of Rs.9.69 crores should be stayed.
3. On the other hand, ld. DR objected to the complete stay of demand and submitted that the assessee should be directed to pay at least part of the demand before 31st March 2015.
4. After considering the submissions of the parties and looking to the prima facie case of the issues involved, we are of the opinion that the balance of convince is in favour of the assessee for partial stay of demand. After discussing with the parties we direct as under;
(a) Assessee shall pay a sum of Rs.50 lacs on or before 27th March 2015 ; Subject to such payment the balance outstanding demand shall be stayed for the period of six months from the date of this order or till the passing of the order in the appeal filed by the assessee, whichever is earlier;
(b) The appeal of the assessee would be heard on priority basis and after discussing with the parties the date of hearing of the appeal is fixed for 4th June 2015;
3 SA No.55/Mum/2015 (c) the assessee shall not seek any adjournment except for on bonafide and genuine reasons.
5. The Registry is directed to fix the hearing of appeal for 4th June 2015 and no separate notice shall be issue to the parties.
6. In the result, the Stay Application filed by the assessee is partly allowed in the manner indicated above.
Order pronounced on this 13th March, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- ( N.K. BILLAIYA) (AMIT SHUKLA) [ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, dated 13-03-2015. Patel copy to... 1. The appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) - Concerned, Mumbai 4. The CIT- Concerned, Mumbai 5. The DR Bench, D 6. Master File // Tue copy// [[[[[[ BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free