RESEARCH NOW INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI V. ACIT,CIRCLE-19(1), NEW DELHI

SA 237/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Research Now India Pvt. Ltd., which filed a stay petition concerning an outstanding demand of INR 1,60,30,693 for the Assessment Year 2016-17, related to transfer pricing adjustments. The Tribunal had previously directed the assessee to pay 20% of the demand, which was complied with. The stay was extended multiple times due to ongoing legal proceedings concerning the limitation issue, influenced by a decision from the Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT v. Roca Bathroom Products P. Ltd. The Department of Revenue sought adjournments in related cases pending before the Tribunal, and a similar adjournment was granted in this case due to the pending Supreme Court decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34977 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• 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: A NKIT SAHNI
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; Application of stay

Judgement Text

"S.A.No.237/Del/2025 [In ITA No.854/Del/2021] Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “I-FRIDAY” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.A.No.237/Del/2025 [In ITA No.854/Del/2021] [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Research Now India Pvt. Ltd. 10th Floor, Building No.14B, DLF Cyber City, Phase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana. PAN-AAECR9894G vs ACIT, Circle-19(1) Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Sahni, Adv. 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 2016-17 requesting for the grant of stay of outstanding demand of INR 1,60,30,693/-. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in the instant case, the appeal is filed by the assessee bearing ITA No.854/Del/2021 against the final order passed by the AO. The original stay petition bearing S.A.No.209/Del/2021 was disposed off by the Tribunal in terms of its order dated 02.09.2022 wherein the Tribunal has directed the assessee to pay 20% of the outstanding demand with respect to the addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment made. The assessee incompliance to the directions by the Tribunal, had paid a sum of INR 12,70,000/- on 14.09.2022. The said stay was extended by the Tribunal vide order dated 17.03.2023, 07.07.2023, 29.12.2023, 05.07.2024 and 04.10.2024. In terms of the last order of the Tribunal extending the stay on 04.10.2024, the stay granted is expired on 02.04.2025. Therefore, the assessee had filed a fresh stay petition before the Tribunal for stay of balance outstanding demand. S.A.No.237/Del/2025 [In ITA No.854/Del/2021] Page | 2 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 14.01.2025, 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. 3. After considering the facts, we allow the stay petition of the assessee where the assessee has already paid 20% of the outstanding demand related to transfer pricing adjustment and accordingly the balance demand is hereby stayed 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. 4. With the above direction, the stay petition filed by the assessee is allowed. 5. 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 * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "