JT.CIT ( OSD) - 8 (3)(2), MUMBAI V. VODAFONE INDIA SERVICES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

MA 72/MUM/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5906 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMATHA MULLAMUDI
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH J, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 72/MUM/2020 ( ARISING OUT OF IT A NO. 481 /MUM/201 9 ) : (A.Y : 2014 - 15) J CIT (OSD) - 8 ( 3 )( 2 ), MUMBAI (APPLICANT) VS. VODAFONE INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD., DMD ADVOCATES, 121 MAKER CHAMBERS - IV, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021. PAN : AAAC Z1849D (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MS. SAMATHA MULLAMUDI RESPONDENT BY : MS. FERESHTE SETHNA DATE OF HEARING : 2 5/0 9 /20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 /0 9 /20 20 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, REVENUE SEEKS TO MODIFY THE STAY ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN SA NO. 481/MUM/2019 DATED 31.01.2020 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15. THE CONTENTS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER : - 1. THE ASSESSEE FILED STAY APPLICATION BEFORE HON'BLE ITAT, MUMBAI IN SA NO.481/MUM/2019 SEEKING STAY ON OUTSTANDING DEMAND OF RS.1318,68,18,297/ - FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15. 2. THE HON'BLE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 31/01/2020 DISPOSED OFF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT INITIATE COERCIVE STEPS FOR RECOVERY OF OUTSTANDING DEMAND FOR THREE 2 MA NO. 72/MUM/2020 VODAFONA INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD. WEEKS, DURING WHICH TIME THE ASSESSEE SHALL APPROACH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(ADMIN.) FOR STAY OF OUTSTANDING DEMAND. 3. IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED TO THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL THAT DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING ON 31.01.2020, THREE WEEKS' TIME WAS NEVER MENTIONED. IN FACT, THE HON'BLE MEMBER (J) CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THE ORDER WILL BE PASSED WITHIN A WEEK'S TIME AND IN THE MEANTIME, THE ASSESSEE CAN APPROACH TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER REGARDING THE STAY. FURTHER, THE DEPARTMENT WILL NOT TAKE ANY COERCIVE ACTION TILL THAT PERIOD. 4. IT IS ALSO MENTIONED IN THE ORDER THAT THE ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JANUARY, 2020. IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE WAS HEARD ON 31.01.2020 AND THE ORDER WAS NOT PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN CO URT GRANTING THE ASSESSEE THREE WEEK'S TIME. IN FACT, IT WAS STATED BY THE HON'BLE MEMBER (J) THAT THE ORDER WILL BE PASSED WITHIN A WEEK'S TIME REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE AO. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THOUGH THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED ON 31.01.2020, BUT IT WAS NOT UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE AT LEAST TILL 05.02.2020. 5. FURTHER, IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THREE WEEK'S TIME GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE STAY PETITION BEFORE THE AO/PCIT IS UNREASONABLE LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS IT TANTAMOUNT TO GRANTING OF STAY TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEARING THE ARGUMENTS OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID, THE APPELLANT ABOVE NAMED BEGS TO PRESENT THIS APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF THE DIRECTIONS TO THE ABOVE EXTENT TO PROTECT TH E INTEREST OF REVENUE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. DR STATED THAT THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WOULD BE RELEVANT AT THE TIME OF PREFERRING THE SAME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND AFTER PREFERRING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION DUE TO CONTINUOUS LOCKDOWN ANNOUNCED BY THE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO COVID - 19 PANDEMIC, THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION WOULD BE IRRELEVANT AT THIS STAGE. 3. THE LD. AR ALSO STATED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AS IT WOULD BE IRRELEVANT AT THIS POINT IN TIME DUE TO SUBSTANTIAL LAPSE OF TIME. 3 MA NO. 72/MUM/2020 VODAFONA INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES AND ACCORDINGLY, DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IN THE INSTANT CASE AS NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY ADJUDICATING THE SAME AS OF NOW. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE VIRTUAL HEARING ON 25 TH SEPTEMBER, 20 20 . SD/ - SD/ - ( M. BALAGANESH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DATE : 25 TH SEPTEMBER , 20 20 *SSL* COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, J BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI