RAM REDDY JAKKIDI,HYDERABAD V. ITO, WARD- 11(2), HYDERABAD

SA 36/HYD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ram Reddy Jakkidi, the appellant, who filed stay applications against the outstanding tax demands for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2014-15. The appellant argued that the additions made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) regarding 'on money' payments for land purchases were unjust, as the payments were made equally by multiple co-owners. The Tribunal noted that a significant portion of the disputed amounts had already been paid and that the appeals were scheduled for a hearing soon, which influenced their decision to grant a temporary stay on the recovery proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 834270 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Recovery proceedings; Application of stay
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीऱीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad श्री विजय पाऱ राि, माननीय उपाध्यक्ष एिं श्री मंजूनाथ जी, माननीय ऱेखा सदस्य SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G., HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.A.No.36/Hyd/2025 and 37/Hyd/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.1882/Hyd/2025 and 1883/Hyd/2025) (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13 and 2014-15) Ram Reddy Jakkidi Hyderabad PAN : AFPPJ3009L Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-11(2) Hyderabad (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri K.Sriram, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr.Sachin Kumar, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 06.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date of Pronouncement : 06.02.2026 O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : By way of these stay applications, the appellant seeks stay for outstanding demand of Rs.79,15,000/- for the A.Y.2012-13 and Rs.61,64,400/- for the A.Y. 2014-15. Printed from counselvise.com 2 SA Nos.36/Hyd/2025 & 37/Hyd/2025 Ram Reddy Jakkidi 2. The learned counsel for the assessee, referring to the assessment order submitted that, the appellant is having a prima facie case on merits, because, the A.O. has made addition towards on money payment made for purchase of land in toto in the case of the appellant, even though the assessee explained that the land has been purchased by the appellant along with 7 other co-owners and cash payment made for purchase of land was paid equally by all the parties. Further, the appellant is having balance of convenience in his favour. Further, the appellant had also paid a sum of Rs.41,31,531/- for the A.Y.2012-13, which is more than 20% of the disputed amount and Rs.1,86,790/- for the A.Y.2014-15. Therefore, he submitted that till disposal of appeal filed by the appellant, stay may be granted for the balance outstanding demand. 3. The Ld.Sr.AR for the Revenue, on the other hand, submitted that it is a second round of litigation before the Tribunal and in the earlier round of litigation, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh. In the second round of proceedings, the CIT(A) upheld the additions made by the A.O. and from that, it is very clear that the appellant does not have any case Printed from counselvise.com 3 SA Nos.36/Hyd/2025 & 37/Hyd/2025 Ram Reddy Jakkidi on merits. Further, appeals filed by the appellant were posted for hearing on 04.02.2026 and on that day, the counsel for the assessee had sought adjournments and therefore, the appeals have been again posted for hearing on 09.03.2026. Since the appeals were already posted for hearing on 09.03.2026, there is no need to grant stay for outstanding demand. 4. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee and also learned Sr.AR for the Revenue and we find that, the stay application filed by the appellant was initially posted for hearing on 30.01.2026. At the time of hearing of stay application, it was noticed that the appeals filed by the assessee were posted for hearing on 04.02.2026 and therefore, the stay applications has been adjourned to 06.02.2026. However, on 04.02.2026, the counsel for the assessee sought adjournment of hearing and the cases were fixed for hearing on 09.03.2026. The learned counsel for the assessee has made a statement at bar that, he is ready to argue the appeals if the cases are preponed to any date after 15 days or on 09.03.2026 and till that date, stay may be granted for balance outstanding demand. We find Printed from counselvise.com 4 SA Nos.36/Hyd/2025 & 37/Hyd/2025 Ram Reddy Jakkidi that the appellant had already paid more than 20% of the disputed demand for the assessment year, 2012-13. Further, the appeals filed by the assessee have been posted for hearing on 09.03.2026. Since the date of hearing of the appeals is very near and further, the appellant has already discharged the substantial portion of disputed amount for both the assessment years, in our considered view, a direction may be given to the Ld.AO to keep the recovery proceedings in abeyance till the next date of hearing of the appeals i.e. on 09.03.2026. Accordingly, the Ld.DR is directed to inform the A.O. for not taking any coercive steps for recovery of demand upto 09.03.2026. The learned counsel for the assessee is also directed to argue the appeal on the next date of hearing and in case, if he seeks adjournments if any, on the next date of hearing, then protection granted upto 09.03.2026 shall be withdrawn. 5. With these observations, the stay applications for both the assessment years are disposed of. Printed from counselvise.com 5 SA Nos.36/Hyd/2025 & 37/Hyd/2025 Ram Reddy Jakkidi Order pronounced in the Open Court on 6th February, 2026. Sd/- (श्री विजय पाऱ राि) (VIJAY PAL RAO) उपाध्यऺ /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (मंजूनाथ जी) (MANJUNATHA G.) ऱेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 06.02.2026. L.Rama/sps आदेशकी प्रतततिति अग्रेतषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. तिर्ााररती/The Assessee : Shri Ram Reddy Jakkidi, Flat No.1-44, Sathireddy Complex, NH-44, Kompally, Hyderabad 2. राजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(2), Hyderabad 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. तिभागीयप्रतततितर्, आयकर अिीिीय अतर्करण, हैदराबाद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. गार्ाफ़ाईि / Guard file आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad Printed from counselvise.com LOKIREDDI RAMA Digitally signed by LOKIREDDI RAMA Date: 2026.02.09 11:47:22 +05'30' "