FCS MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), MUMBAI

SA 165/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves FCS Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd., which filed a stay application against the recovery of an outstanding demand for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The demand was based on certain additions made during the assessment, which the assessee contested as unsustainable on merits. The assessee had already paid 20% of the demand and an additional amount post the coercive action of attaching their bank account. The Tribunal considered the payments made, the prima facie case presented by the assessee, and the balance of convenience in deciding to grant the stay on the recovery of the remaining demand.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827228 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAN KOSURI
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, AM SA No. 165/Mum/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.6918/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) FCS Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd. Building C, Block No. 218, Xcelon Industrial Estate, Nr. Pharmaceuticals-II, Chancharvadi Vasna, Ahemdabad, Gujarat-382213 Vs. ACIT-Central Circle 2(1) Room No. 804, 8th Floor, Pratishtha Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN/GIR No. AAECF 0667 M (Applicant) : (Respondent) Applicant by : Ms. Amrin Pathan (Virtually appeared) Respondent by : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 09.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2026 O R D E R The captioned stay application has been filed by the assessee/applicant seeking stay on recovery of outstanding demand, pertaining to the Assessment Year (A.Y. for short) 2020-21. 2. We have heard the parties and perused the materials available on record. The ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the additions based on which the demand has been raised is unsustainable on merits. She submitted, since the assessee has a strong prima facie case it is hopeful of getting substantial relief in the appeal. She further submitted that post completion of assessment, the assessee has paid an amount of Rs.28,90,163/, which covers 20% of the demand. She further submitted that in the Printed from counselvise.com 2 SA No. 165/Mum/2025 (A.Y.2021-22) FCS Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT meanwhile the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) has taken coercive action by attaching the bank account of the assessee and has recovered an amount of Rs.11,68,600/-. In this context, she drew our attention to the Affidavit filed by the assessee. She submitted that the payment made by the assessee covers almost 30% of the outstanding demand. Thus, she requested for stay of the balance demand. 3. Having considered rival submissions and perused the materials available on record, we are convinced that the assessee has not only made out a strong prima facie case in its favour but balance of convenience is also in favour of the assessee, since, 30% of the demand has already been paid. We have further noticed that the appeal has already been fixed for hearing on number of occasions earlier and on the last date of hearing, i.e., on 07.01.2026, the matter got adjourned at the request of the Revenue and now it is fixed for hearing on 25.02.2026. Considering all these facts, we are in favour of granting stay on recovery of the balance outstanding demand for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of the corresponding appeal, whichever is earlier. The A.O. is directed to vacate the attachment forthwith. It is made clear, in the event of assessee seeking adjournment in absence of compelling reasons in future, there is likelihood of the stay granted being vacated. 4. In the result, stay application is allowed as indicated above. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.01.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Prabhash Shankar) (Saktijit Dey) Accountant Member Vice President Mumbai; Dated : 09.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com 3 SA No. 165/Mum/2025 (A.Y.2021-22) FCS Manufacturing (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT Roshani, Sr. PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT - concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "