ACT INFRAPORT LIMITED,MUMBAI V. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

SA 8/MUM/2026

AI Insights

The case involves ACT Infraport Limited, the appellant, seeking an extension of a stay previously granted by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai. The stay was initially granted to prevent the recovery of an outstanding demand by adjusting it against a tax refund due to the assessee for the assessment year 2024-25. The Tribunal noted that the department had already adjusted a significant amount from the refund towards the outstanding demand. The appeal was adjourned sine die, and the Tribunal directed the registry to fix a new date for the hearing. The decision to extend the stay was influenced by the lack of change in facts and circumstances since the original stay was granted.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829298 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2026
• Other Referred Cases: Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SWAPNIL CHOUDHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: RITIKA SACHADE
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.6844/Mum/2024 AND S.A. No.8/Mum/2026 Arising out of I.T.A. No.6844/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 ACT Infraport Limited 14 Shipping House, Ground Floor, 26, Kumpta Street, Fort, Mumbai 400001 PAN:AAECA9098H Vs. Dy. CIT, Circle 1(1)(1) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) Mumbai-400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by MS. Ritika Sachade Respondent by Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR.DR) Date of Hearing 16/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement 16/01/2026 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present stay application has been filed by the assessee seeking extension of the stay granted by this Tribunal dated 18.07.2025. 2. The Ld. AR has submitted that the first stay was granted by this Tribunal in SA No. 2/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2021-22, vide order Printed from counselvise.com P a g e | 2 SA. 8/Mum/2026 AY:2021-22 ACT Infraport Limited dated 10.01.2025 subject to recovery of outstanding demand by way of adjustment of refund due to the assessee. 2.1. We are informed, the department has adjusted an amount of Rs.2,28,54,700/-, being the refund due for A.Y. 2024-25, against the outstanding demand of the impugned year, which is more than 34%. 2.2. After having both sides and perusing the material available on record. It is noticed that no disposal of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee. Issue is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case since the grant of stay vide order dated 18.07.2025. Following the decision of rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd reported in 376 ITR 87 which was confirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court relied in (2021) 126 taxmann.com 69, stay in extended for further period of 180 days or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier from the date of this order. 3. It is informed that the appeal has been adjourned sine di. Accordingly, we direct the registry to fixed the appeal for hearing on 11.02.2026. Both parties involved in open court and no further notice intimating date of hearing shall be issued. Printed from counselvise.com P a g e | 3 SA. 8/Mum/2026 AY:2021-22 ACT Infraport Limited In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/01/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai: Dated: 16/01/2026 Divya Ramesh Nandgaonkar, Stenographer Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "