AI Insights
The case involves Maruti Suzuki India Limited, which filed stay applications against the income tax demands for the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2020-21. The applications were heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench. The tribunal considered the history of the case, including previous stays and adjournments requested by the Department. The tribunal decided to grant an extension of stay based on the circumstances presented, including the adjournments and non-functioning of the bench during the scheduled hearings.
Appeal Details
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
CRN Number
Duration Of Justice
9 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Stay Application
Pronouncement Date
25-03-2026
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
Delhi
Assessment Year
2014-2015
Appeal Filed On
16-03-2026
Judgement Text
"STAY APPL. NOS. 166, 172 & 173/Del/2026 MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Stay Application Nos.166, 172/Del/2026 (In ITA Nos.3186/Del/2024, 8009/Del/2018) िनधा\u0005रणवष\u0005/Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2014-15 MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. 110070. PAN No.AAACM0829Q बनाम Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Circle 16(1), New Delhi. अपीलाथ\u0011 Appellant \u0013\u0014यथ\u0011/Respondent & Stay Application No.173/Del/2026 (In ITA No.8968/Del/2019) िनधा\u0005रणवष\u0005/Assessment Years: 2015-16 MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. 110070. PAN No.AAACM0829Q बनाम Vs. ACIT, Special Range-6, New Delhi. अपीलाथ\u0011 Appellant \u0013\u0014यथ\u0011/Respondent Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Soumya Jain, CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\bतारीख/ Date of hearing: 20.03.2026 उ\u000eोषणाक\bतारीख/Pronouncement on 25.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. On hearing Ld. Sr. Counsel, we find that as far as the stay application for AYs 2014-15 & 2015-16 is concerned the arguments have Printed from counselvise.com STAY APPL. NOS. 166, 172 & 173/Del/2026 MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. 2 been heard and order stand reserved. In regard to stay application for AY 2020-21 the Ld. Sr. Counsel has pointed out that earlier stay was granted in the matter and the last effective order is dated 29.09.2025 which is expiring on 18.03.2025. 2. It comes up that during the period the appeals when listed on three occasions Department had sought adjournment while on two occasions the Bench did not function. On 25.02.2026 appeals for AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 have been heard and orders are reserved. In the light of aforesaid circumstances, the application for extension of stay for AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2020-21 stand allowed and stay for impugned demands is granted for a period of 180 days or disposal of appeal whichever is earlier. Order pronounced in the open court on 25.03.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25.03.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "
Other Referred Cases
-
Laws Referred To
-
1:1 Consultation on FEMA Compliance
₹1
Consultation on Entity Formation
₹0
Tax Holiday Secrets for Startups
₹0
No Objection Letter for Use of Property – Partnership Firm
₹0
Rectification Letter - Application for rectification of mistake under Section 154 of I.T. Act
Mehul₹0
Why Lacoste Won a 20-Year Trademark Battle Against Crocodile ?
Team Counselvise - March 10, 2026
Delayed ITR Verification and Denial of Section 80P Deduction: A Critical Analysis of ITAT’s Ruling
Team Counselvise - March 27, 2026
SEBI Resets Mutual Fund Rules: A Structural Shift for Investors
Team Counselvise - March 13, 2026