AJAY GUPTA,FARIDABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD

SA 354/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ajay Gupta, the appellant, who filed a stay application against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, concerning an outstanding tax demand of \\u20b91,33,53,280 for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee argued that the assessment order leading to this demand was unsustainable and that there was a strong prima-facie case for the addition to be deleted upon merit review. However, the Departmental Representative opposed the stay, and the Tribunal, referencing a prior decision where the stay was denied, dismissed the current application. The Tribunal also highlighted the upcoming hearing date for the appeal, advising the assessee to focus on the merits of the case in the scheduled hearing rather than seeking a stay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31796 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 02-09-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KATOCH; SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: JITENDER WADHWA
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI FRIDAY FRIDAY FRIDAY FRIDAY BENCH BENCH BENCH BENCH- - - -A A A A : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI : NEW DELHI BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE VICE VICE VICE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT AND AND AND AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN , , , , ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER Stay Application No. Stay Application No. Stay Application No. Stay Application No.3 3 3 354 54 54 54/Del/2024 /Del/2024 /Del/2024 /Del/2024 (In ITA No.3011 (In ITA No.3011 (In ITA No.3011 (In ITA No.3011/Del/2024) /Del/2024) /Del/2024) /Del/2024) Assessment Yea Assessment Yea Assessment Yea Assessment Year r r r : 20 : 20 : 20 : 2017 17 17 17- - - -18 18 18 18 Shri Ajay Gupta, Shri Ajay Gupta, Shri Ajay Gupta, Shri Ajay Gupta, 293, Sector 293, Sector 293, Sector 293, Sector- - - -15, 15, 15, 15, Faridabad, Faridabad, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana Haryana Haryana – – – – 121 006. 121 006. 121 006. 121 006. PAN : BDPPG7239G. PAN : BDPPG7239G. PAN : BDPPG7239G. PAN : BDPPG7239G. Vs. Vs. Vs. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Ward Ward Ward Ward- - - -1(1), 1(1), 1(1), 1(1), Faridabad. Faridabad. Faridabad. Faridabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Jitender Wadhwa, CA. Respondent by : Shri Amit Katoch, Senior DR. Date of hearing : 11 11 11 11.10 .10 .10 .10.2024 .2024 .2024 .2024 Date of pronouncement : 11 11 11 11. . . .10 10 10 10.2024 .2024 .2024 .2024 ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER Per Saktijit Dey, Vice Per Saktijit Dey, Vice Per Saktijit Dey, Vice Per Saktijit Dey, Vice President President President President : : : : Present application has been filed by the assessee seeking stay on recovery of outstanding demand amounting to `1,33,53,280/- for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. While urging for stay, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment order giving rise to the present demand is unsustainable in law. He submitted, on merits also, the assessee has a strong prima-facie case and the addition resulting in the present demand would be deleted once the appeal is heard on merits. 3. Learned DR strongly opposed grant of stay. 4. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is observed, the assessee had earlier filed a stay application seeking stay on recovery of the very same outstanding demand. The said stay application registered as S.A. No.230/Del/2024 was disposed of by the Stay – 354/Del/2024 2 Tribunal vide order dated 26th July, 2024 declining to grant stay on recovery of outstanding demand on the reasoning that the assessee failed to establish any prima-facie case. There is no change in the factual position to compel us to differ from the view taken by the Coordinate Bench while disposing of the earlier stay application filed by the assessee. In any case of the matter, it is observed, the corresponding appeal of the assessee is already fixed for hearing on 6th November, 2024. Therefore, it is in the interest of the assessee to go ahead with the hearing of the appeal on the scheduled date. In view of the aforesaid, we are not in favour of granting stay on recovery of outstanding demand. Accordingly, stay application is dismissed. 5. In the result, the stay application of the assessee is dismissed. Above decision was pronounced in the open Court on 11th October, 2024 on conclusion of hearing. Sd/- Sd/- ( ( ( (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN S. RIFAUR RAHMAN S. RIFAUR RAHMAN S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) ) ) ) (SAKTIJIT DEY (SAKTIJIT DEY (SAKTIJIT DEY (SAKTIJIT DEY) ) ) ) ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER VICE VICE VICE VICE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT VK. Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "