RELIGARE ENTERPRISES LTD.,NOIDA V. ACIT, CIRCLE-19(1), DELHI

SA 238/DEL/2025

AI Insights

Religare Enterprises Ltd. filed a stay petition with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal seeking to extend the stay on an outstanding demand of INR 1,08,53,62,764 for the assessment year 2017-18. The Tribunal had previously granted several extensions to the stay, with the latest expiring on 04.04.2025. The case involves a significant legal issue regarding the limitation period, influenced by a pending appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court concerning the case of CIT v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd. The Tribunal considered the ongoing legal proceedings and the absence of fault on the part of the assessee in seeking adjournments, leading to the decision to grant the extension of the stay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470108 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: CIT. v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd
• Laws Referred To: CIT. v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd (2022) 445 ITR 537 (Madras)
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY VOHRA; .
• Keywords: Application of stay; Extension of stay

Judgement Text

"S.A.No.238/Del/2025 [In ITA No.332/Del/2022] Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “H-FRIDAY” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.A.No.238/Del/2025 [In ITA No.332/Del/2022] [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Religare Enterprises Ltd. Plot No.A-3,4 & 5, Club 125, Tower B, Sector-125, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301. PAN-AAACV5888N vs ACIT Circle-19(1) Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Mr. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Ms. Somya Jain, CA Respondent by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 04.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.04.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : This Stay petition filed by the assessee for AY 2017-18 requesting for the grant of stay of outstanding demand of INR 1,08,53,62,764/-. 2. Initially the stay was granted by Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 25.02.2022 in Stay Application No.62/Del/2022 till the next date of hearing i.e. on 06.04.2022 and thereafter the instant stay application for extension was filed by the assessee which was heard on 08.04.2022 and the Registry was directed to put the stay application for extension on 18.05.2022. Subsequently on 18.05.2022 the stay was extended till 02.08.2022. Thereafter, on many occasions stay was extended from time to time and lastly, it was extended vide order dated 04.02.2025 till 19.03.2025. It appears from the records, that the stay is being extended from 2022 till today and in between the assessee filed only one application for extension of stay. S.A.No.238/Del/2025 [In ITA No.332/Del/2022] Page | 2 3. The general procedure followed by us granting stay for 180 days has already elapsed without there being any new application filed for extension of stay. 4. In terms of the last order of the Tribunal extending the stay on 21.03.2025, the stay granted is expired on 04.04.2025. Therefore, the assessee had filed a fresh stay petition before the Tribunal for stay of balance outstanding demand. It is submitted by the Ld.AR that the issue of limitation is involved in this case wherein the Tribunal is consistently followed the view that the case of the assessee is barred by limitation in terms of order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT. v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd (2022) 445 ITR 537 (Madras). As the Department is in appeal against such order before the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the hearing is likely to be concluded soon and therefore, Department is seeking adjournment in the cases pending before the Tribunal. In the instant case also, on 21.03.2025, on the request of the Revenue, the case of the assessee was adjourned sine die due to the limitation issue involved. There is no fault on the part of the assessee in taking adjournment in the matter. 5. After considering the facts, we allow the stay petition of the assessee for a further period of 180 days or till the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT. v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd in SLP No.34673/2022 whichever is earlier. 6. With the above directions, the stay petition filed by the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, the Stay Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04th April, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT * Amit Kumar * (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.A.No.238/Del/2025 [In ITA No.332/Del/2022] Page | 3 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "