CITRIX SYSTEMS ASIA PACIFIC PROPRIETARY LIMITED,AUSTRALIA V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 1(1), BENGALURU

SA 121/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, which filed a stay petition under section 253(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking to halt the recovery of a disputed demand of Rs.41,28,12,320 for the assessment year 2022-23. This demand arose from an assessment order passed under sections 143(3) read with 144C(13) of the Act. The Tribunal considered the precedents set by the ITAT, High Court, and Supreme Court in similar cases involving the assessee. The Departmental Representative argued that the assessee should deposit at least 20% of the outstanding tax before a stay could be granted, which the Tribunal did not accept, citing the prima facie merits of the case and the potential injustice to the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780590 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N. BALUSAMY
• Assessee Lawyers: TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Application of stay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SP No.121/Bang/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.756/Bang/2025) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited Ashurst, Level 16, 80 Collins Street, South Tower, Malbourne, VIC 3000, Australia C/oMessrs King & Partridge Advocates 48, Lavelle Road Bangalore 560 001 PAN NO : AADCC8874E Vs. DCIT (International Taxation Circle 1(1) Bangalore APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, A.R. Respondent by : Sri N. Balusamy, D.R. Date of Hearing : 10.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.10.2025 O R D E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This stay petition u/s 253(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) filed by the assessee company seeking stay of the disputed demand of Rs.41,28,12,320/- raised by way of a notice of demand u/s 156 of the Act dated 23.1.2025 for the assessment year 2022-23 arising out of the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act dated 23.1.2025. The assessee has filed the following reasons in its application for seeking the stay of demand: Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 2 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 3 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 4 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 5 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 6 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 7 of 10 Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 8 of 10 2. Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar vehemently submitted that the balance of convenience lies in favour of the assessee as the case is entirely covered in the assessee’s own case by the order of ITAT, Hon’ble High Court, as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court, as detailed below: Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 9 of 10 2.1 Further, the ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that the assessee company was also part of the batch of the engineering analysis case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and requested a full stay of demand. Lastly, the ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that although the grounds related to Roca Bathroom issues were not pressed by the assessee, on merits, the issues involved in the appeal are fully covered, as can be verified from the above chart. 3. Ld. D.R., on the other hand, vehemently objected to the stay petition and submitted that the assessee must deposit at least 20% of the outstanding tax before the stay is granted. 4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. A perusal of the provisions of section 254(1) of the Act shows that the Appellate Tribunal may, after giving both the authorities below an opportunity of being heard, pass such order thereon as it thinks fit. After analyzing the facts and considering the submissions made by both parties and also the material placed on record, we cannot brush aside the fact that the issue involved in the appeal of the assessee is prima facie covered in favour of the assessee. The ld. D.R. also could not brought any material on record to controvert the submissions as made by the AR of the assessee. Therefore, we do not agree with the argument of ld. D.R. that to obtain a stay against the recovery of demand, the assessee company must deposit 20% of the outstanding demand. 4.1 Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it will cause injustice to the assessee, if we direct to pay 20% of the outstanding demand and accordingly we direct the ld. AO to keep the recovery of entire impugned outstanding Printed from counselvise.com SP No.121/Bang/2025 Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Proprietary Limited, Bangalore Page 10 of 10 demand in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal or 180 days from the date of this order, whichever is earlier. 5. In the result, the stay petition filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th Oct, 2025 Sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Accountant Member Sd/- (Keshav Dubey) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 10th Oct, 2025. VG/SPS Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. Printed from counselvise.com "