Samir Ghosh, Siliguri V. ITO, Ward-2(3), Siliguri

ITA 628/KOL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7647 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUCHETA CHATTOPADHYAY RAY
• Assessee Lawyers: DIRAJ LAKHOTIA
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 264

Judgement Text

1 ITA No.628/Kol/2020 Samir Ghosh, AY 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Manish Borad, AM ] I.T.A. No. 628/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Samir Ghosh (PAN: AAAFE8681R) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Siliguri Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 24.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 28.02.2022 For the Appellant Shri Diraj Lakhotia, Advocate For the Respondent Smt. Sucheta Chattopadhyay Ray, CIT, DR ORDER Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Pr. CIT, Siliguri dated 09.12.2020 for AY 2017-18 passed u/s. 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee Shri Diraj Lakhotia submittd that the assessee has moved this application before this Tribunal u/s. 220(6) of the Act for AY 2017- 18. According to Ld. AR, pursuant to an assessment order passed against the assessee huge demand was raised by the AO against the assessee. Therefore, the assessee moved an application for stay of demand vide application dated 09.01.2020 which was rejected by the AO vide order dated 22.01.2020. According to the Ld. AR, thereafter the assessee moved a revision petition before Ld. Pr. CIT (Siliguri) u/s. 264 of the Act along with application for stay of demand. According to the Ld. AR the same was disposed of by Ld. Pr. CIT vide order dated 09.12.2020 on the ground that the said petition was not accompanied by evidence of payment of requisite fee. According to Ld. AR, the assessee had paid the required fee and also had enclosed challan during the proceedings. However, the Ld. Pr. CIT ignored the same and rejected the stay application. Being aggrieved by the impugned order of the Ld. Pr. CIT, Siliguri the assessee has preferred this appeal before this Tribunal. 2 ITA No.628/Kol/2020 Samir Ghosh, AY 2017-18 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR Smt. Sucheta Chattopadhyay Ray opposes the maintainability of this application. According to Ld. DR, when the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Ld. Pr. CIT u/s. 264 of the Act, he is precluded from filing an appeal before this Tribunal. At this juncture, the Ld. AR has preferred to withdraw the appeal with a prayer that he should be given liberty to file the appeal if permitted by law and to agitate the issues as per law. In the light of the aforesaid prayer of the assessee, we dismiss this instant appeal with the liberty to the assessee as prayed for, if the law permits. 4. In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed as withdrawn as (indicated above). Order is pronounced in the open court on 28th February, 2022. Sd/- Sd/ (Manish Borad) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 28 th February, 2022 JD(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant – Shri Samir Ghosh, C/o Pradip Lakhotia, 2 nd Floor, Metro Plaza, SF Road, Siliguri, West Bengal-734005. 2 Respondent – ITO, Ward-2(3), Siliguri. 3. 4. 5. PCIT , Siliguri DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mal) /True Copy, By order, Assistant Registrar