Excellence Data Research Private ... vs Assessee
- CitationITA.No.310/Hyd/2015 - Assessment Year 2010-2011
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The grant of a stay of recovery of the balance outstanding demand, pending the assessee's appeal, is made on condition that the assessee first deposits a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs against the outstanding demand. In deciding whether a stay is warranted, the balance of convenience is assessed by reference to the assessee's undisputed position on the disputed addition: where the assessee's contention that two of the comparables selected for transfer pricing adjustment ought to be excluded is supported by a prior decision of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, and the revenue does not oppose that submission, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the assessee, and a stay may be granted subject to a part payment of the demand.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
M/s. Excellence Data Research The ACIT, Circle 17(1) P. Ltd., Hyderabad. vs. Hyderabad. PAN AABCE4933C (Applicant) (Respondent)
For Applicant : Mr. K. R. Vasudevan For Respondent : Mr. Rajat Mitra
Date of Hearing : 24.04.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 24.04.2015
ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M.
By this application, assessee seeks stay of outstanding demand of Rs.1,69,42,340 for A.Y. 2010-2011.
2. We have heard both the parties and also perused the material available on record. It is observed that the impugned outstanding demand has arisen as a result of T.P. adjustment of Rs.5.28 crores made by the A.O. and this entire addition is disputed by the assessee in the appeal filed before the Tribunal being ITA.No.310/Hyd/2015 which is now fixed for hearing on 02.06.2015. As submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, out of the 8 comparables finally selected by the A.O. as per the direction of the DRP to make the addition on account of T.P. adjustment, the assessee is disputing inclusion of 4 comparables. He has submitted that out of these 4 comparables being disputed by the assessee, the issue relating to exclusion of 2 comparables namely Cosmic Global Ltd., and Accentia Technologies Ltd., is already covered in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in assessee's own case 2 SA.No.20/Hyd/2015 in ITA.No.310/Hyd/2015 M/s. Excellence Data Research P. Ltd., Hyderabad.
for the earlier year. He has submitted that if these two comparables selected by the A.O. are excluded and the T.P. adjustment is re-worked out, the resultant outstanding demand would be only about Rs.1 crore including interest of Rs.27 lakhs. He has submitted that the assessee is ready to pay a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs against this outstanding demand by 30th April if the recovery of balance outstanding demand is stayed and is also ready to undertake not to take any adjournment on 02.06.2015, the date on which the appeal of the assessee is fixed for hearing before the Tribunal.
3. Keeping in view the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee which have not been objected to or opposed by the learned D.R., we are of the view that the balance of convenience clearly lies in favour of the assessee and it is a fit case to grant stay of outstanding demand, subject to payment of Rs. 25 lakhs by the assessee by 30th April, 2015. Accordingly, we direct the assessee to deposit a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs against the outstanding demand by 30th April, 2015 and subject to the said payment, grant the stay for recovery of the balance outstanding demand for a period of six months or till the appeal of the assessee is disposed of by the Tribunal whichever is earlier.
4. In the result, stay application of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24.04.2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 24th April, 2015 VBP/- 3
SA.No.20/Hyd/2015 in ITA.No.310/Hyd/2015 M/s. Excellence Data Research P. Ltd., Hyderabad.
Copy to
1. M/s. Excellence Data Research P. Ltd., The 'V' Park, Plot No.17, Vega Block, 8th Floor, Software Units Layout, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 500 081.
2. The ACIT, Circle 17(1), 6th Floor, Room No.622, I.T. Towers, 'B' Block, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad.
3. Disputes Resolution Panel, 2nd Floor, I.T.Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad - 500 024.
4. CIT-III/Member, DRP, Hyderabad
5. CIT(A)-11/Member, DRP, Hyderabad.
6. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Transfer Pricing)-II, Hyderabad - 500 004.
7. Director of Income Tax, International Taxation, I.T. Towers, 10-2-3, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004.
8. The Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad - 004.
9. D.R. "B" Bench, ITAT, Hyderabad.
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