M/s Kuber Products Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT

R.K. Panda, AM

The assessee, through these Stay Applications requests the Tribunal to stay the realization of outstanding demand of Rs.58,19,929/- for Assessment Year 2012-13 and Rs.54,71,696/- for Assessment Year 2013-14.

The learned counsel for the assessee referring to the contents of the Stay Applications for both the Assessment Years submitted that the Assessing Officer has determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,29,52,434/- as against the returned income of Rs.2,47,566/- for the Assessment Year 2012-13. Similarly, he has determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,31,58,685/- as against the returned income declaring loss of Rs.13,41,315/-. He submitted that out of the demand of Rs.68,69,929/- which includes interest u/s 234A of Rs. 1,26,072/- and interest u/s 234C of Rs.25,21,440/-, the assessee has already paid an amount of Rs.10,50,000/-for Assessment Year 2012-13. Similarly, as against the total demand of Rs.64,46,696/- which includes interest u/s 234A of Rs.1,28,080/- and u/s 234C of Rs.20,49,280/-, the assessee has already paid an amount of Rs.9,75,000/- for Assessment Year 2013-14. The learned counsel for the assessee while explaining a prima facie case in favour of the assessee for both the years submitted that the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee for Assessment Year 2009-10. Similarly, for Assessment Year 2010-11, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed on account of low tax effect. So far as, the Assessment Year 2011-12 is concerned, no appeal has been filed by either side. He submitted that the assessee has a strong prima facie case in its favour since the assessment has been framed in utter disregard of the provisions of section 153C of the Act. So far as, the financial condition of the assessee is concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is passing through severe financial crisis and is not in a position to make any further payment. He accordingly submitted that full stay should be granted to the assessee against the realization of outstanding demand for both the Assessment Years. He also requested for an out of turn hearing of both the appeals.

The learned DR on the other hand, strongly objected to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee for granting of stay on realization of outstanding demand. He submitted that the assessee has not filed its bank statement to prove the financial hardship faced by the assessee. He submitted that the assessee should be directed to pay forthwith the entire outstanding demand since the learned CIT(A) has already dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the records. After considering the arguments made by both the sides, we are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case for grant of absolute stay for realization of outstanding demand. We, therefore, dismiss the Stay Applications filed by the assessee for both the Assessment Years. However, the request of the assessee for out of turn hearing of the appeals is accepted and the appeals are fixed for hearing on 14.06.2021 which was announced in the open court. It was further announced that no separate notice of hearing shall be sent to which both the parties agreed. The Stay applications filed by the assessee are accordingly disposed off in the terms indicated hereinabove.

Oder pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 16/04/2021.