Case Law Details

Case Name : Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : S.A. No. 211/Mum/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 18/09/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2012-2013
Courts : All ITAT (7352) ITAT Mumbai (2112)

Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the stay of demand will be granted for the 2nd time to the assessee or not?

ITAT states that, the AR reiterated that Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) proceedings are still pending with competent authority for year under consideration and the same shall have direct bearing on assessed income. It has been submitted that MAP proceedings are underway and likely to be settled. The assessee has duly complied with all the conditions imposed in earlier stay orders including partial payment of outstanding demand and the assessee has already paid more than 30% of the total demand. The assessee deserve extension of stay. Accordingly, the stay is granted for a further period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier. The conditions imposed in all the earlier stay orders shall remain intact.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

1. By way of this Stay Application for Assessment Year [AY] 2012-13, the assessee seeks extension of stay of outstanding demand of Rs.55.40 Crores out of total demand of Rs.78.80 Crores. The last of such extension was granted by the Tribunal vide SA No.442/Mum/2019 order dated 29/11/2019 for a period of 180 days or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier and accordingly, the stay has already expired.

2. Drawing our attention to the stay petition, Ld. AR reiterated that Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) proceedings are still pending with competent authority for year under consideration and the same shall have direct bearing on assessed income. It has been submitted that MAP proceedings are underway and likely to be settled. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that the assessee has duly complied with all the conditions imposed in earlier stay orders including partial payment of outstanding demand and the assessee has already paid more than 30% of the total demand. The quantum appeal is stated to be fixed for hearing on 10/11/2020. The Ld. DR opposed any further extension of stay.

3. Upon due consideration of stated factual matrix, the bench formed an opinion that the assessee deserve extension of stay. Accordingly, the stay is granted for a further period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier. The conditions imposed in all the earlier stay orders shall remain intact. Both the parties shall make endeavor for early disposal of quantum appeal.

4. The stay application stand allowed in terms of our above order.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18th September, 2020

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

October 2020
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031