EUI LIMITED,GURUGRAM V. DCIT INTL. TAXATION, GURGAON

SA 65/DEL/2025

AI Insights

EUI Limited filed a stay application (SA No. 65/Del/2025) related to an outstanding tax demand for the assessment year 2020-21, initially granted a stay with conditions that were later modified. The Tribunal had previously required a bank guarantee for 20% of the demand, which was dispensed with after the Revenue adjusted a significant refund against the demand. The case also raised issues regarding the non-mentioning of the DIN in orders and the limitation on passing orders, referencing decisions from the Supreme Court and Madras High Court. The Department sought adjournments, and the demand was marked as 'Non-Collectable' due to the stay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 313941 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Brandix Mauritius Holding Ltd. v. Additional ground on limitation of passing of the order, CIT v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) Ltd. 140 taxmann.com 304 (Mad.)
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHISHEK DEVAL; MOHNISH DIGRA; DCIT INTL. TAX; CIRCLE; GURGAON
• Assessee Lawyers: PARTH
• Keywords: Application of stay; Extension of stay
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

"1 SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA No. 2329/Del/2023) EUI Ltd. v. DCIT Intl. Taxation A.Y: 2020-21 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘D’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA no. 2329/Del/2023) Assessment Year.: 2020-21 EUI Limited, 5th Floor, Tower B, Building No. 6, GIL IT/ITES SEZ, Sector 21, Dundahera, Gurgaon Haryana-122001. v. DCIT, International Taxation , Gurgaon. PAN No: AACCE 8854 F APPLICANT RESPONDENT Assesseeby : Shri Parth, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Abhishek Deval, Sr. DR; & Dr. Mohnish Digra, DCIT (Intl. Tax),Circle, Gurgaon (AO) Date of Hearing :09.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement :09.05.2025 ORDER PER RAMIT KOCHAR, AM: The assessee has filed this stay application in SA No. 65/Del/2025 which has arisen from ITA no. 2329/Del/2023 for assessment year 2020-21, seeking extensionof stay on recovery of the outstanding demand to the tune of Rs. 3,07,81,807/-. It is the 2 SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA No. 2329/Del/2023) EUI Ltd. v. DCIT Intl. Taxation A.Y: 2020-21 say of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Tribunal after considering the entire matrix surrounding the case hasoriginally granted stay on the recovery of outstanding demand vide order dated 25.08.2023 in SA No. 319/Del/2023 on the condition that the assessee furnish the Bank Guarantee to the tune of 20% of the outstanding demand. It is the say of ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Revenue-CPC adjusted refund of Rs. 1,15,19,769/- against the impugned demand , while directions were to furnish bank guarantee. The assessee moved Miscellaneous application(MA) before the Tribunal which was listed as MA No. 374/Del/2023 , which was adjudicated by the Tribunal vide order dated 07.02.2024 , wherein Tribunal took note of the fact of adjustment of refund of Rs. 1,15,19,769/- by Revenue which covers more than 25% of the total demand , and hence Stay order dated 25.08.2023 in SA NO. 319/Del/2023 was modified and condition of submission of Bank Guarantee was dispensed with by the Tribunal, as the Revenue has already collected more than 25% of the outstanding demand by way of adjustment of refund due to the assessee. It was prayed that the balance outstanding demand be stayed as the Tribunal has already considered the relevant facts and granted the stay on the recovery of the outstanding demand. Thus it was submitted that no fault can be attributed to the assessee and prayers were made to grant stay on the recovery of the remaining outstanding demand. It was also submitted that the issue involved in the appeal is concerning non-mentioning of the DIN in the orders , and our attention was drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Brandix Mauritius Holding Ltd. Additional ground on limitation of passing of the order has also been raised keeping in view the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Roca Bathroom Products (P) Ltd. 140 taxmann.com 304 (Mad.) , and which issue in the case of Roca is sub-judiced before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Judgment and order is awaited. 3 SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA No. 2329/Del/2023) EUI Ltd. v. DCIT Intl. Taxation A.Y: 2020-21 2. Ld. DR submitted that the assessee may be asked to deposit further amount so that entire demand stood deposited. 3. After hearing both the parties we are inclined to extend the stay on the recovery of the remaining outstanding demandfor a further period of 180 days or till disposal of the corresponding appeal , as the factual circumstances and matrix as were before the Tribunal for grant of extension of stay vide orders dated 9.8.2024 in SA No. 291/Del/2024 arising out of ITA no. 2329/Del/2023 for assessment year 2020-21, remains the same. The assessee has already deposited 25% of the demand , and it is the Department who is seeking adjournment since the grant of last extension of stay vide orders dated 09.08.2024, keeping in view the issue of DIN and that of limitation raised by the assessee based upon judgment and order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Roca Bathroom Products (P) Ltd. (supra) which is now subjudiced before Hon’ble Supreme Court and orders are awaited. As directed by the Bench on the earlier occasion, the ld. AO-Dr. Mohmish Dogra, DCIT, International Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon is present before the Bench and has filed his submissions vide letter dated 25.04.2025 in which it is mentioned that the aforesaid demand is marked as ‘Non-Collectable’ on the ITBA portal with remarks that ‘demand is not recoverable as Recoverability status is Demand stayed by Courts/ITAT’ . It is observed that since the grant of last extension of stay by the Tribunal vide orders dated 09.08.2024, it is 4 SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA No. 2329/Del/2023) EUI Ltd. v. DCIT Intl. Taxation A.Y: 2020-21 the Department who is seeking adjournment(s) on all the occassions, and since more than 25% of the demand already stood deposited and further that no circumstances have changed and no fault could be attributed to the assessee, we are inclined to extend the stay on recovery of the outstanding demand for A.Y. 2020-21 for a further period of 180 days or till disposal of the corresponding appeal, whichever is earlier. We order accordingly. 4. In the result, stay application in SA No. 65/Del/2025 is allowed in the manner as indicated in this order Order pronounced in the open court on 09thMay, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUDHIR PAREEK) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13.5.2025. *MPV* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DRP 5. DR 6. Guard File 5 SA No. 65/Del/2025 (In ITA No. 2329/Del/2023) EUI Ltd. v. DCIT Intl. Taxation A.Y: 2020-21 Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "