DY.CIT 5(3)(2), MUMBAI V. VODAFONE INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

MA 192/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5290 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH KUMAR SINGH
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 192; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH MUMB AI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 192/MUM/2019 IN S.A NO. 446/MUM/2018 (A.Y 2011-12 ) DCIT-5(2)(2), ROOM NO. 571, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020. VS. M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE INDIA LTD), BIRLA CENTURION, PLOT NO. 794, PANDURANG BUDHKAR MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI-400030. PAN: AAACH5332B APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANISH KUMAR SINGH (SR.DR) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NITESH JOSHI (AR) DATE OF HEARING : 05.07.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.07.2019 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(2)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, J.M. 1. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA) IS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR VACATING THE STAY ORDER GRANTED IN S.A. NO. 446/MUM/2018 IN ITA NO. 884/MUM/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 05.10.2018 . IN THE MA, THE APPLICANT/REVENUE HAS STATED THAT AS PER THIRD PROV ISO TO SECTION 254(2A) THE STAY GRANTED ON 05.10.2018 BE VACATED FORTHWITH. TH E LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE MADE HIS SUBMISSION ON THE LINES OF CONTENTS OF MA. 2. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TS THAT THE STAY GRANTED VIDE ORDER DATED 05.10.2018 HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPIRE D ON 05.04.2019 AND THE STAY WAS FURTHER EXTENDED ON FRESH STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A FURTHER PERIOD OF SIX MONTH. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSE SSEE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY HONBLE JURISDICT IONAL HIGH COURT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE ON THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY R EVENUE VIDE W.P. NO. M.A. NO. 192 MUM 2019-M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD. 2 464/2016 DATED 23.03.2016, WHEREIN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT BY REFEREEING THE DECISION IN CIT VS. TATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASH TRA) LTD. (W.P. NO. 3437/2015 DATED 16.12.2015 AND IN NARANG OVERSEAS ( P.) LTD. VS. ITAT REPORTED IN 295 ITR 22 AND CIT VS. RONAK INDUSTRIES (333 ITR 99) AND HELD THAT EVEN AFTER SUBSTITUTION OF 3 RD PROVISO TO SECTION 254(2A), THE TRIBUNAL HAVE POWER TO EXTEND THE STAY BEYOND A PERIOD OF 36 5 DAYS. 3. IN THE REJOINDER SUBMISSION, THE LD. DR FOR THE REV ENUE SUBMITS THAT THE BENCH MAY TAKE A DECISION AND PASS THE ORDER IN ACCORDANC E WITH LAW ON THE MA FILED BY REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF BOTH THE PARTI ES. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN PCIT VS. ITA IN W.P. NO. 464/2016 DATED 23.03.2016, WHEREIN THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING ORDER: 2 THE STAY GRANTED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDERS IS FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS FROM ITS DATE I.E. 17TH JULY, 2015 AND U- SEPTEMBER, 2015. T HUS, IN THE PRESENT FACTS, THE IMPUGNED ORDERS HAVE EXHAUSTED ITS LIFE AND ARE NO LONGER IN FORCE. THUS, THE CHALLENGE TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS PURELY ACADEMIC. THEREFORE, WE SEE NO REASON TO ENTERTAIN THE PETITIONS. 3 BE THAT AS IT MAY, THE ISSUE AS MENTIONED HEREIN ABOVE, IS NO LONGER RES INTEGRA SO FAR AS THIS COURT IS CONCERNED IN VIEW OF THE DE CISION OF THIS COURT IN CIT V/S. TATA TELESERVICES (MAHARASHTRA) LTD. (WRIT PETITION (L) NO.3437 OF 2015) RENDERED ON 16TH DECEMBER, 2015. IN THE ABOVE CASE, THIS COURT FOLLOWING THE EARLIER DECISION OF THIS COURT IN NARANG OVERSEAS ( P) LTD. V/S. ITAT - 295 ITR 22 AND CIT VS. RONAK INDUSTRIES 333 ITR 99- HELD THAT EVEN AFTER SUBSTITUTION OF THE THIRD PROVISO TO SECTION 254(2A) OF THE ACT, THE TR IBUNAL WOULD HAVE POWER TO EXTEND THE STAY BEYOND A PERIOD OF 365 DAYS AS PROV IDED THEREIN. M.A. NO. 192 MUM 2019-M/S VODAFONE IDEA LTD. 3 5. CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HONBLE HIGH COURT WHIC H IS SELF-EXPLANATORY THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAVE POWER TO EXTEND THE STAY BEY OND 365 DAYS. THE MA FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, MA FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.07.2019. SD/- SD/- SHAMIM YAHYA PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 05.07.2019 SK COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. DR J BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, DY./ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI