sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
« From the Courts »
 Aaishwarya Dying Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
 Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Co Ltd vs Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission & Anr.
 A.P.State Electricity Board . & Ors. vs M/s Navabharat Ferro Alloys Ltd.
 CLC & Sons Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) (Special Bench)
 Deepak Sales & Properties Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) (Special Bench)
 Alok Textile Industries Ltd vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court)
 Dulraj U. Jain vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Halcrow Group Ltd vs. ADIT (ITAT Delhi)
  Kudrat Sandhu vs. UOI (Supreme Court)
 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs Bharati Vidyapeeth Chairman
 Chief Revenue Controlling Officer Cum Inspector General Of Registration, & Ors. vs P. Babu

Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd, 2nd floor,Harchandrai House, 81 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai 400002 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-B(2), Mumbai-400020
November, 06th 2012
                               SA No.287 to 289 of 2012 Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd Mumbai

                       "H " Bench, Mumbai

          Before Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member
               and Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member

                    SA No.287 to 289/Mum/2012
          (Arising out of ITA No.4839 to 4841/Mum/2011)
          (Assessment years: 1999-2000, 2003-04 & 2004-05)

Hindustan Organic Chemicals           Vs.      Asstt. Commissioner of
Ltd, 2nd floor, Harchandrai                    Income Tax, Circle-B(2),
House, 81 Maharshi Karve                       Mumbai-400020
Road, Mumbai 400002
(Appellant)                                         (Respondent)

                     Assessee by:   Shri K.Gopal/Jitender Singh
                     Department by: Shri Amardeep, DR

                     Date of Hearing:       02/11/2012
                     Date of Pronouncement: 02/11/2012


Per B. Ramakotaiah, A.M.

       These stay petitions are filed by assessee seeking stay of
disputed demand to an extent of `.1.48 crores. Assessee is a Public
Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacturing and
trading of chemicals and has been continuously declaring losses. In
all these years the issue of demand pertains to levy of penalty under
section 271(1)(c).
2.    The learned Counsel submitted that AO made additions on
account    of   depreciation   claims,      valuation          of    closing        stock,
disallowance of prior period expenses, disallowances under section
43B and of similar nature and assessee being in perpetual losses,
did not contest major additions as the benefit would be given in
other years. In view of this it was submitted that levy of penalty
under section 271(1)(c) is not warranted on the facts of the case as
these are only disallowances made in the course of the assessment
which do not attract levy of penalty. He also placed on record the
balance sheet of the company to explain the financial position and

                                   Page 1 of 2
                              SA No.287 to 289 of 2012 Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd Mumbai

requested for staying of the demand. In A.Y 1999-2000 on the issue
of section 263, the case was posted on 14.11.2012 and requested
for granting hearing on that day along with that appeal.

3.    The learned DR however, objected to the stay petitions.

4.    We have considered the issue. Considering the nature of the
additions/disallowances made, we are of the view that there is a
prima facie case in favour of assessee. Assessee's financial position
also suggests that the demands raised cannot be paid immediately.
Considering these facts we grant stay of the demand for a period of
six months or disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier. The cases
are   posted   on   14.11.2012.    Assessee          should        not      seek       any
adjournment without any valid reason. The parties were informed
about the posting of the cases on the day and issuance of separate
notice is dispensed with.

5.    In the result, stay applications filed by assessee are allowed.

      Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd November, 2012.

              Sd/-                                     Sd/-
         (Amit Shukla)                           (B. Ramakotaiah)
        Judicial Member                         Accountant Member

Mumbai, dated 2nd November, 2012.

Copy to:
  1. The Appellant
  2. The Respondent
  3. The concerned CIT(A)
  4. The concerned CIT
  5. The DR, " H " Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                              By Order

                         Assistant Registrar
                    Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
                      Mumbai Benches, MUMBAI

                                  Page 2 of 2
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Sitemap

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions