CHHATTISGARH STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED, RAIPUR V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(1), RAIPUR

SA 04/RPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6511 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: TDS Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESHWAR RAO; SAI PAWAN VED
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Application of stay
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH , RAIPUR BEFORE S HRI N.K. BILLAIYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) SA NO. 04 /RPR /20 1 8 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 12 /RPR / 2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2014 - 15 M/S CHHATISGARH STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., THE HITAVAD PARISAR, AVANTI VIHAR, RAIPUR (C.G.) PAN: AACCC1772C VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3(1), AAYKAR BHAVAN, CIVIL LINES, RAIPUR (CG) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESHWAR RAO & SHRI SAI PAWAN VED (SR. ADVOC ATE/ADVOCATE ) REVENUE BY : SHRI P.K. MISHRA (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 05/03 /201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 / 0 3 /201 8 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THI S IS AN APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR STAY OF RECOVERY OF DEMAND AMOUNTING TO RS 74,81,06,290/ - RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN TERMS OF ORDER DATED 30.11.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 4 - 1 5 . 2. BEFORE US, T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITT ED THAT THE APPLICANT/ ASSESSEE , THE CHHATTISGARH STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD. , INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 , IS A NODAL AGENCY OF GOVT. OF 2 SA NO. 04 /RPR /2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 CHHATTISGARH , WHICH IMPLEMENTS PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION SCHEME OF THE GO V ERNMENT . AS PER THE SCHEME THE ASSESSEE PROCURES COMMODITIES AT NOTIFIED PRICES AND DISTRIBUTES AT CONCESSIONAL RATES PRESCRIBED BY THE GOVT. IF THE NOTIFIED RATE IS LESS THAN THE DISTRIBUTION PRICE , THE ASSESSEE HAS TO REFUND THE EXCESS AMOUNT AND IF IT IS MORE, THE DIFFERENCE IS CLAIMED FROM THE GOVERNMENT. 3. T HE ASSESSEE CHANGED THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WHICH RESULTED DECREASE IN PROFIT BY RS. 1,94,31,98,824/ - . ACCORDINGLY, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF THE AFORE SAID AMOUNT TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE HAS ALSO BEEN REJECTED . THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED OR DER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) WHICH IS PENDING DISPOSAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE DECI SIONS OF THE VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AND THE TRIBUNAL, MONEY PAID BY THE GOVERNMENT TO AN AGENCY IN FIDUCIARY CAPACITY FOR IM PLEMENTING ITS SCHEME IS NOT THE INCOME OF THE AGENCY, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO INCOME A SSESSAB LE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE OPERATIONS ARE BEING RUN THROUGH BANK FINANC E WHICH IS REPAID AFTER RELEASE OF FUNDS BY THE GOVT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS PRE SSING VERY HARD FOR RECOVERY OF DISPUTED DEMAND . 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A PRIMA FACIE GOOD CASE AND B A LANCE OF CONVENIENCE IS IN ITS FAVOUR. ON THE OTHER HAND D ENIAL OF INTERIM RELIEF BY WAY OF STAY ON RECOVERY OF DEMAN D MAY LEAD TO IRREPARABLE LOSS TO THE ASSESSEE. THE L D. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL DISPUTED DEMAND AN AMOUNT OF 15,00,00,000/ - HAS ALREADY BEEN PAID. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER STATED AT B AR THAT APART FROM THE SAID AMOUNT, THE ASSESSEE H AS PAID 5,00,00,000/ - AFTER FILING OF THE PRESENT APPLICATION . 3 SA NO. 04 /RPR /2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) OPPOSED THE APPLICATION AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DIRECTED TO PAY AT LEAST 50% OF THE TOTAL DEMAND. 7. WE HAVE H EARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AS THE SAME IS CONTRARY TO THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE HIGH COURTS AND VARIOUS TRIBUNALS. AS STATED BY T HE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE HA S ALREADY PAID 20 ,00,00,000/ - OUT OF THE TOTAL DEMAND. THE ASSESSEE HAS PRIMA FACIE CASE WHICH IS NOT LIKELY TO BE DISPOSED OF WITHIN A SHORT PERIOD. KEEPING IN VIEW THE NATURE OF JOB OF THE ASSESSEE, WE DO NOT CONSIDER IT AP PROPRIATE TO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PAY 50% OF THE TOTAL DEMAND. HOWEVER, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PAY RS.5,00,00,000/ - BY 31 ST OF MARCH 2018 AND STAY THE RECOVERY OF REMAINING AMOUNT OF D EMAND FOR 180 DAYS OR TILL DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. THE STAY APPLICATION IS ACCORDINGLY DISPOSED OF. IN THE RESULT, STAY APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH MARCH, 2018 . SD/ - SD/ - ( N.K. BILLAIYA ) ( RAM LAL NEGI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RAIPUR ; DATED: 05 / 0 3 / 201 8 ALINDRA PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 4 SA NO. 04 /RPR /2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014 - 15 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , RAIPUR / DR, ITAT, RAIPUR 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// PR IVATE SECRETARY ITAT, RAIPUR