Sri Satyendra kr. Mehra, V. ACIT,

SA 2/RAN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9568 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 11 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Application of stay; Set aside
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

1 SP NO.02/RAN/2013 [IT(SS) A NO.09/RAN/12] SH.SATYENDR KR. MEHRA INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CIRCUIT BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT , AND HON'BLE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S.P NO. 02/RAN/2013 [ ARISING OUT OF IT (SS) A NO. 09/RAN/12 ] BLOCK PERIOD: 1 - 4 - 1986 TO 29 - 1 - 1996 SHRI. SATYENDRA KR. MEHRA, RANCHI VS. ACIT, CENT. CIR - 3, RANCHI PAN:AENPM8950J ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPLICANT/ASSESSEE : SRI ABHISHEK KUMAR , LD.AR FOR THE DEPARTMENT : SHRI DEEPAK ROSHAN, SR.S.C/LD.DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.12. 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01.12. 2014 O R D E R SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS STAY PETITION SEEKING STAY OF OUTSTANDING DEMAND IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S 158BC OF THE ACT. WE NOTICE THAT THE REGISTRY HAS SENT A DEFECT MEMO TO THE ASSESSEE POINTING OUT THE DEFECTS IN THE APPLICATION VIZ., ABSENCE OF AF FIDAVIT, APPLICATION NOT IN PROPER FORM. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEP TO RECTIFY THOSE DEFECTS. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE DIRECT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL ACCORDINGLY BEFORE THE ITAT AND THE TRIBUNAL HAD SET ASIDE THE ENTIRE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE 2 SP NO.02/RAN/2013 [IT(SS) A NO.09/RAN/12] SH.SATYENDR KR. MEHRA ASSESSING OFFICER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD CONTENDED ABOUT NON - PROVIDING OF OPPORTUNITY T O HIM. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO PASSED A FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER IN 2007. AGAINST THE SAID ORDER, THE ASSESSEE, INADVERTENTLY FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD CIT(A). AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE REVENUE CAME ON APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL AND THE TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE SAID APPEAL WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE ITAT ON 24.5.2012. ACCORDING TO LD A.R, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED A PETITION REQUESTING THE TRIBUNAL TO CONDONE THE DELAY. 3. HOWEVER, WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED FULL DETAILS WITH RELEVANT DATES IN THE PETITION FILED BEFORE US. FURTHER, AS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY, THE STAY APPLICATION WAS NOT FILED IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND IT WAS A LSO NOT SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN THE RELEVANT DETAILS LIKE DEMAND RAISED, THE PAYMENT, IF ANY, MADE TILL DATE, THE OUTSTANDING DEMAND ETC. HAVE NOT BEEN MENTIONED IN THE PETITION. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED DETAILS A BOUT HIS FINANCIAL POSITION. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THERE EXISTS PRIMA FACIE CASE AGAINST THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BARRED BY LIMITATION AND THE DELAY HAS NOT BEEN CONDONED SO FAR. WITHOUT CONDONING THE DELAY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS HAVING BEEN ADMITTED, MEANING THEREBY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT, WHI CH WOULD HAVE GIVEN JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SAID LEGAL POSITION AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO RECTIFY THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY AND ALSO IN V IEW OF THE DISCUSSIONS MADE SUPRA, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRESENT STAY 3 SP NO.02/RAN/2013 [IT(SS) A NO.09/RAN/12] SH.SATYENDR KR. MEHRA APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 01.12.2014 IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/ - SD/ - [ H.L. KARWA ] [ B.R. BASKARAN ] PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 01.12.2014 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPLICANT /ASSESSEE : 2 RESPONDENT /DEPARTMENT : 3 . CIT, 4 . CIT(A), 5 . DR, ITAT, RANCHI **PP/SPS / TRUE COPY] BY ORDER, ASSTT REGISTRAR. 4 SP NO.02/RAN/2013 [IT(SS) A NO.09/RAN/12] SH.SATYENDR KR. MEHRA 1. DATE OF DICTATION ............ S.P PREPARED ON MEMBER S LAPTOP .................... 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ................ ........OTHER MEMBER ............................... 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. ..................... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT......................... 1.12.1 4 ................................................... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S ................ 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK ....................................... 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ......................................... 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ................................................................................................. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..............................................................