Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 03 ITAT CK 2928

MyKaarma.com India Private Limited vs DCIT, Circle 16(1), Delhi

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 13 March 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
S. Rifaul Rahman, Accountant Member · Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
Stay Application No. 157/Del/2026 (Arising out of ITA No. 5935/Del/2024), A.Y. 2021-22 & Stay Application No. 158/Del/2026 (Arising out of IT(TP) A No. 130/Del/2026), A.Y. 2022-23

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 465 words

ORDER

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM

Applicant/Assessee, MyKaarma.com India Private Limited, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the assessee’) filed the present stay application for stay of recovery of outstanding demand for the AY 2021-22 & 2022-23.

2.

At the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has a prima facie case and it is a small software company. Its outstanding demand is out of TP adjustment and further submitted that the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) has passed the final assessment order, however, in computation sheet, the Ld. AO has wrongly adopted the assessee’s income. With the above correct computation of taxable income, the net demand for assessment year 2021-22 is Rs. 63,81,926/- and for assessment year 2022-23 the correct balance tax due is Rs. 1,81,69,444/- and he submitted that 20% of the same comes to Rs. 12.76 lacs for A.Y. 2021-22 and 36.34 lacs for assessment year 2022-23.

2.1

Further, he submitted that the Ld. AO has already determined tax refund of Rs. 14,32,830/- for assessment year 2025-26. He submitted that the same may be directed to adjust against the total demand if that being the case the balance 20% of the outstanding demand will be Rs. 34.72 lacs for both AYs. and prayed that the balance outstanding demand may be stayed.

3.

On the other hand, Ld. DR objected to the above proposition and submitted that the assessee has not brought on record any financial difficulties for grant of stay.

4.

Considered the rival submissions and the material placed on record, it is brought to our notice that the assessee has a good prima facie case and the total outstanding demand for assessment year 2021-22 and 2022-23 is Rs. 63,81,926/- and Rs. 1,81,69,444/- respectively, the above figures are adjusted and corrected computation of income. It is brought to our notice that the Ld. AO has adopted assessee’s wrong income while computing the tax demand. After considering the corrected figure, 20% of the outstanding demand for both assessment years comes to 48.84 lacs and the Ld. AO has already determined the refund due for the assessee in assessment year 2025-26 to the extent of Rs. 14,32,830/-.

5.

Accordingly, we direct the Ld. AO to adjust the above refund against the present outstanding demand in A.Y. 2021-22 and 2022-23. Since, the assessee has balance of convenience in its favour, we direct the assessee to deposit 35 lacs by end of this month and submit the payment challan to the Registry as well as to the Ld. AO. With the above condition, the stay is granted to the assessee for balance outstanding for a period of 180 days or till disposal of appeal whichever is earlier.

5.

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed.