BINNY BANSAL,SINGAPORE V. DCIT,IT, CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

SA 97/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Binny Bansal, who applied for an extension of stay regarding an outstanding tax demand for the assessment year 2020-21. The original stay was granted by the Tribunal in a previous order, and the assessee sought an extension citing no change in circumstances and compliance with the conditions of the stay. The Departmental Representative did not object to the extension as the assessee had already deposited 20% of the demand as directed by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal considered the arguments and the compliance history of the assessee and decided to extend the stay, noting that the appeal was scheduled for a hearing soon, where the arguments for the Revenue would be presented.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772933 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Extension of stay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No. 97/Bang/2025 [in ITA No.571/Bang/2023] Assessment year : 2020-21 Binny Bansal, 11, Nathan Road, # 24-02, Singapore – 0248732. PAN: AKEPB 4202D Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle 1(1), Bangalore. APPLICANT RESPONDENT Applicant by : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate Respondent by : Shri Balusamy N., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 19.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This application is made by the assessee for extension of stay already granted to the assessee for AY 2020-21 for an outstanding demand amounting to Rs.204,34,32,627 in SA No.14/Bang/2024 dated 1.3.2024 and extended by Tribunal orders dated 2.9.2024 and 7.3.2025. The assessee submits that the above stay may further be extended and has also given tabulation of the dates and events as per para 11 of the Stay Petition stating that the delay in disposal of the appeal is not on account of the assessee. The assessee has also reiterated the same set of facts Printed from counselvise.com SP No.97/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 3 claiming that balance of convenience on the merits lies in favour of the assessee. 2. The ld. DR did not object to the stay petition as assessee has already deposited 20% of the outstanding demand as per direction of the ld. AO. 3. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the ld. lower authorities as well as the original stay granted to the assessee by the coordinate Bench. We find that there is no violation of the conditions of the stay originally granted as well as the delay in disposal of the appeal is also not attributable to the assessee. As there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case when original stay was granted to the assessee, we direct the ld. AO to keep the demand in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal or 180 days from the date of this order, whichever is earlier. It was further stated that the appeal is scheduled for hearing on 24.9.2025 wherein the ld. ASG is supposed to submit the arguments on behalf of the Revenue. The argument of the assessee has already been completed by the ld. AR. 4. In view of the above facts, we allow the application of the assessee for extension of stay as indicated above. Pronounced in the open court on this 22nd day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( SOUNDARARAJAN K. ) ( PRASHANT MAHARISHI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Bangalore, Dated, the 22nd September, 2025. /Desai S Murthy / Printed from counselvise.com SP No.97/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 3 Copy to: 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore. Printed from counselvise.com "