Monica Arunkumar Khanna, vs Assessee
- CitationITA No.3170/Mum/2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
On an application for stay of demand, the Tribunal may refuse a stay where, prima facie, the balance of convenience does not favour the assessee, having regard to the portion of the disallowance the assessee has admitted and the reasoned confirmation of the balance by the first appellate authority. Where the hearing of the connected cross-appeals is expedited at the joint request of both sides and with the Revenue's consent, the Tribunal may prepon the hearing date accordingly, so that the assessee's tax liability is settled at the earliest.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Applicant by Shri Rakesh Milwani, (AR) Respondent by Shri Vivek A. Perampurna (DR)
Date of Hearing : 17-04-2015 Date of Pronouncement : 17-04-2015
ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.
By way of this Stay Application, the assessee seeks for stay of outstanding demand of Rs. 47,67,077/- which has mainly arisen on account of Rs.83,03,025/- made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the IT Act.
2. After considering the rival submission and on perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that out of disallowance of Rs.83,03,025/-, the assessee appears to have admitted the disallowance to the extent of Rs.60,65,742/- and for the balance 2 SA No.119/Mum/2015
disallowance, the CIT(A) has given detail reasoning for confirming the same. Thus, prima facie the balance convenience is not in the favour of the assessee to grant stay of demand. Accordingly, the stay application is rejected.
3. It has been informed by the parties that the hearing of the cross appeals have now been fixed for 20th October 2015. The Ld. Counsel requested that the hearing may itself be pre-poned to an earlier date so that tax liability of the assessee can be settled at the earliest. The ld. DR also does not have any objection for preponement of the hearing. After discussion with the parties, the hearing of the appeal in ITA No.3170/M/2012 and ITA No.2653/M/2012 is pre-poned for 27.04.2015. Registry is accordingly directed to fix the hearing of the appeal for 27.04.2015.
4. In this result, the Stay Applications filed by the assessee is dismissed in the manner indicated.
Order pronounced on this 17th April, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (D. KRUNAKARA RAO) (AMIT SHUKLA) [ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, dated 17-04-2015. Patel 3 SA No.119/Mum/2015
copy to... 1. The appellant 2. The Respondent
3. The CIT(A) - Concerned, Mumbai
4. The CIT- Concerned, Mumbai
5. The DR Bench, B
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