Cisco Systems Inc Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
The ITAT Bangalore considered the assessee’s miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking rectification of the stay order passed in SA No.20/Bang/2026 dated 16.03.2026. The assessee alleged that the Assessing Officer had disregarded and violated the Tribunal’s stay order concerning recovery of demand for A.Y. 2023-24 and had recovered Rs.205,90,60,377 despite being informed of the stay. The assessee further stated that, despite bringing the alleged violation to the AO’s notice, steps had not been taken to restore the status quo ante or restitute the amounts recovered during the operation of the stay. It sought directions for immediate refund, exemplary costs and such further action as deemed appropriate.
The Departmental Representative submitted that the Revenue was making full efforts to refund the amount as early as possible.
The Tribunal observed that Section 254(2) empowers it to rectify a mistake in its order where such mistake is apparent from the record. In the present case, the Tribunal found that the assessee had not pointed out any error in the stay order dated 16.03.2026. The grievance concerned the alleged recovery by the AO despite the stay order, rather than any mistake in the Tribunal’s own order. The Departmental Representative also assured the Bench that the Revenue was in the process of granting the refund.
