MOHD. SHAHNAWAZ,NEW DELHI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI

SA 462/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple stay applications filed by the same assessee, Mohd. Shahnawaz, seeking to stay the outstanding tax demands for four different assessment years. The applications were heard together due to their related nature. The assessee argued that the additions made to the returned income were arbitrary and constituted a high-pitched assessment, which was partly confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that there was a strong prima facie case and the balance of convenience favored staying the demands due to lack of liquid resources. However, the Departmental Representative did not dispute the factual matrix but opposed the stay. The tribunal, after considering the arguments and the records, decided not to grant the stay, referencing the upcoming appeal hearings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 38340 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 06-12-2024
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP KR. MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: MONIKA AGARWAL
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH FRIDAY ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice President AND Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member SA No. 461/Del/2024 Arising out of ITA No. 1729/Del/2019 Asstt. Year: 2009-10 AND SA No. 462/Del/2024 Arising out of ITA Nos. 1730 & 1879/Del/2019 Asstt. Year: 2010-11 AND SA No. 463/Del/2024 Arising out of ITA No. 1731/Del/2019 Asstt. Year: 2011-12 AND SA No. 408/Del/2024 Arising out of ITA No. 1883/Del/2019 Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Mohd. Shahnawaz, F-7, Feeta Road, Silver Oak Apartment, 2nd floor, Flat No. 40, Shaheen Bagh, Abu Fazal, Okhla, New Delhi – 110 025 (PAN: BAPPS4125Q) Vs ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi – 110 055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 Assessee by : Ms. Monika Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Sandeep Kr. Mishra, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing: 06.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement:06.12.2024 ORDER Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President : These Stay Applications under Rule 35A of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 have been preferred by the same assessee, seeking stay of the outstanding demands in dispute for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15. Since these stay applications are related to the same assessee, hence, these were heard together and disposed of by this common order by dealing with SA No. 461/Del/2019 (AY 2009-10) and the decision thereof will apply mutatis mutandis to other 03 Stay Applications related to assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15, as mentioned above. 2. Ld. AR submitted that the addition made to the returned income is highly arbitrary and is a case of high pitched assessment. She further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily partly confirmed the addition and 3 partially sustained the order of the AO by failing to appreciate the facts in its true perspective, which is untenable in law. She further submitted that the detailed explanation, evidence and material furnished by the assessee in order to substantiate his claim have all been arbitrarily brushed aside and additions made has been arbitrarily confirmed. She further submitted that on the facts of the case, assessee has a strong prima facie case and the balance of convenience is also in his favour. It was the further contention that the applicant does not have liquid resources to pay such a huge demand and as such, outstanding disputed demand deserves to be stayed. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative has not disputed the factual matrix brought out by the Ld. Representative so however, he opposed the plea for grant of stay. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records, especially the orders of the authorities below. We are of the considered view that the assessee has not established any prima facie case for grant of stay towards outstanding demand in dispute. It is also informed that all the 04 corresponding appeals have already been fixed for hearing on 02.01.2025. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the 4 stay on the outstanding demand is not granted. Accordingly, the stay application for the assessment year 2009-10 is dismissed. 5. Following the consistent view as taken in the assessment year 2009- 10, as aforesaid, the other stay applications relating to assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2014-15 also stand dismissed. 6. In the result, all the 04 Assessee’s Stay Applications stands dismissed. Order Pronounced on 06/12/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (Renu Jauhri) (Mahavir Singh) Accountant Member Vice President SR BHATNAGAR Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "