AI Insights
The case involves Chawla Associates, who filed stay applications against the Income Tax Officer, Haldwani, seeking a stay on the recovery of outstanding tax demands for three different assessment years. The applications were based on the pending decision of the Supreme Court regarding the DIN issue, which affected the proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the Departmental Representatives were not arguing these cases due to the pending Supreme Court decision and were instead seeking adjournments. The Tribunal decided to stay the demands, emphasizing that the Revenue could not simultaneously insist on a 20% payment and seek adjournments.
Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 704854 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Stay Application
Pronouncement Date
04-07-2025
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Assessment Year
misc
Judgement Text
" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN BENCH: ‘DB’ DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.A. No. 05 & 06/DDN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.26/DDN/2024), A.Y. 2013-14 S.A. No. 07 & 08/DDN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.25/DDN/2024), A.Y. 2013-14 S.A. No. 09, 10 & 11/DDN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.219/DDN/2024), A.Y. 2016-17 S.A. No. 12 & 13/DDN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.218/DDN/2024), A.Y. 2017-18 Chawla Associates, A-43 Durga Mandir Gali, Rudrapur (Uttarakhand) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Office, Haldwani PAN: AALFC4336N (Applicant) (Respondent) ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Captioned Stay Applications (‘SA’) have been filed by the assessee seeking grant of stay on recovery of the outstanding demands pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘AY’) 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2017-18. Applicant by Shri S. K. Matta, CA Respondent by Shri S. K. Chaterjee, CIT-DR Date of hearing 04.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 04.07.2025 2 SA No.05 to 13/DDN/2025 Chawla Associates, Rudrapur 2. The relevant facts relating to the above captioned SAs are that the assessee has raised the DIN issue in each appeal. Keeping in view the matter pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. in SLP (Civil) dated 03.01.2024, such cases are not being argued by the Ld. Departmental Representatives. Hence, the ITAT benches at New Delhi are adjourning such cases on the request of the Revenue even though the Ld. Authorized Representatives (‘AR’) are ready to argue the cases. On specific query to argue the cases, the Ld. CIT-DR also sought time in these cases. The Ld. AR prayed for stay of demand in all the above- mentioned cases on the reasoning that the Revenue was seeking time though the assessee was ready to argue these cases as it had good chance to succeed on merit. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT-DR strongly requested for payment of 20% of the demand. 3. We have heard both parties and have perused material on records. We find merit in the submission of the Ld. AR that the Revenue cannot insist, at a time, for 20% demand as well as adjournment in these cases. We are refraining to comment on merit of the cases. Since appeals in these cases have been adjourned sine-die due to DIN issue; therefore, the demands in the above-mentioned cases are stayed for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till disposal of these appeals, whichever is earlier. The assessee if so advised, may file paper books on or before the date of hearing of the above-captioned appeals with advance copy(ies) to the opposite side, in accordance with ITAT Rules. 3 SA No.05 to 13/DDN/2025 Chawla Associates, Rudrapur 4. In the result, all the above-captioned SAs are allowed as above. Order pronounced in open Court on 4th July, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 4th/07/2025 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT/CIT 4. Sr. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DEHRADUN "
