Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Royal Canin India Pvt.Ltd, 12A Nichani House, Juhu Tara Road, Santacrius (W), Mumbai-400049 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 11(10(1), Mumbai
August, 31st 2015
                  ,   "                         " 
     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL " K" BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE HON'BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM)
  ,                                            ..,  

                     Stay Application No.229/Mum/2015
         arising out of   ./I.T.A . No .10 53 /M um /20 15
                 (   / As ses sm e nt Ye a r :2 010 -11 )
 Royal Canin India Pvt.Ltd, / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
 12A Nichani House,                 11(10(1),
                            Vs.
 Juhu Tara Road,                    Mumbai
 Santacrius (W),
 Mumbai-400049
       ( /Appellant)        ..      ( / Respondent)

        ./   ./PA N :AADC R44 17J

            / Applicant by               S S C Tiwari
            /Respondent by               Shri Somanath S Ukkali


            / Date of Hearing
                                             : 28.8.2015
           /Date of Pronouncement: 28.8.2015

                                / O R D E R

PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM)

       The assessee has filed this stay application seeking the extension of
stay granted by the Tribunal by its order dated 27.2.2015 passed in SA
No.49/Mum/2015 whereby the assessee was granted stay of collection of
outstanding demand for a period of six months or till the date of disposal
of the appeal which ever period expires earlier , subjected to the payment
of Rs.30 lakhs. Te appeal was also posted for hearing on 23.4.2015 on
out of turn basis.







2.     The ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the
assessee has duly complied with the stay order referred above by paying a
sum of Rs.30 lakhs on 23.3.2015 towards outstanding demand. The ld.
                                      2                   S A N o .2 2 9 / Mu m /2 0 1 5



Counsel submitted that the assessee could not represent the appeal on
23.4.2015, since the Sr. Counsel appearing for the assessee was busy in
the High Court.    Accordingly, the assessee sought adjournme nt on that
date. However, the department sought adjournment on subsequent dates
of hearing held on 17.6.2015 and 24.8.2015.        Accordingly, the ld.            AR
submitted that the delay in disposing of the appeal has occurred due to
the reasons beyond the control of the assessee and accordingly he prayed
that the stay may kindly be extended.


3.     On the contrary, the ld. DR submitted that the appeal was
adjourned on one occasion at the instance of the assessee and accordingly
objected to the stay petition filed by the assessee. In the alternative, the
ld.   DR submitted that the outstanding demand as on today is about
Rs.1.39 crores and the assessee should be asked to pay some more
amount of tax.


4.     In the rejoinder, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has already
complied with the direction given by the Tribunal by paying a sum of
Rs.30 lakhs.     He further submitted that the Tribunal heard the matter at
length on 24.8.2015, but the appeal had to be adjourned at the request of
the ld. DR. He further submitted that the assessee has got fair chance of
winning the appeal.


5.     Having heard the rival contentions, we are of the view that the
assessee should be asked to pay some more amount to protect the
interest of Revenue, since the assessee has sought adjournment on one
occasion. Accordingly, we direct the assessee to pay the sum of R upees
Ten lakhs on or before 15.9.2015. Subject to the payment of Rs.10 lakhs,
referred above, we stay the collection of outstanding demand for a period
of six months from the date of this order or till the date of disposal of the
                                      3                   S A N o .2 2 9 / Mu m /2 0 1 5



appeal, whichever period expires earlier.      It is made clear that the
assessee should not seek adjournment on the date of hearing without a
reasonable cause, failing which this stay order shall be subject to review
by the Division Bench hearing the appeal.







6.     We notice that the appeal has been posted for hearing on
6.10.2015.      Accordingly, we direct the assessee to be present on that
without fail.


7.    In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is treated as
allowed.


                Pronounced accordingly on 28th August, 2015.
                      28th August, 2015    

           Sd                                        sd
(  /JOGINDER SINGH )                      ( .. ,/ B.R. BASKARAN )
  / Judicial Member                        / Accountant Member

  Mumbai: 28th August, 2015.


.../ SRL , Sr. PS

    /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.    / The Respondent.
3.    ( ) / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.     / CIT concerned
5.    ,    ,  /
     DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6.     / Guard file.

                                                            / BY ORDER,

                 True copy                        (Asstt. Registrar)
                                              ,  /ITA T, Mumbai

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting