" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No.47/Bang/2025 [In ITA No. 2362/Bang/2024] Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/s Altair Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., No.46, First Floor, Prestige Trade Tower, Palace Road, Municipal Ward No.77, Sampangiramanagar, Bangalore – 560 001. PAN – AABCA 1860 A Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1)(1), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Swaroop Mannava, JCIT(DR) Date of hearing : 13.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.06.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee by way of this stay application prays for the extension of the stay order which was previously granted vide order dated 18-12-2024 for the stay on the recovery of outstanding demand in SA No. 75/Bang/2024 for 180 days. SA No.47/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 3 . 2. This Tribunal, by an order dated 18-12-2024, was pleased to grant the stay on the recovery of outstanding demand for captioned assessment year. The order of stay was granted for 180 days or till disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal, whichever is earlier. 3. The ld. AR before us submitted that this Tribunal has already found the existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience and relative hardship and has thought it fit to grant an order of stay. Accordingly, the ld. AR claimed that the same should be continued in the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR before us could not controvert the arguments advanced by the ld. AR of the assessee. 5. We have given very careful consideration to the rival submissions. We are of the view that the existence of all conditions for the grant of stay has already been considered by this Tribunal and at this stage new conditions cannot be imposed. All the relevant parameters for the stay of recovery of outstanding demand have already been tested by the Tribunal when it originally granted an order of stay on an earlier occasion. Moreover, the stay order passed by the Tribunal was not challenged by the Revenue. 5.1 It is also pertinent to note that the case for hearing has already been listed i.e. 15-09-2025. Accordingly, there is no need to give a fresh date of the hearing. However, the assessee shall not seek any SA No.47/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 3 . adjournment on the date of the hearing without just cause, otherwise the bench hearing the case shall be its liberty to revoke the stay order. 5.2 For the reasons given above, we direct that there shall be an order of stay on the recovery of outstanding demand for 6 months or till the disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier. The fresh stay petition filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed. 6. In the result, the Stay Application filed by assessee is allowed in terms of above. Order pronounced in court on 13th day of June, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PRAKASH CHAND YADAV) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 13th June, 2025 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "