IN THE INCOM E TAX APPELLATE TRIBU N A L
DELHI BENCH: 'G' NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCO U N TA N T M EM BER
&
SHRI K. N ARASIM HA CHARY, JU D ICIA L M EM BER
Stay application No. 749/del/2019
ITA No. 4 1 9 /D el/ 2017
(Assessm ent Year: 2012-13)
vs DCIT,
Sneh Lata Saw hney, Central circle-7
6, Link Road, Jangpura extension, New Delhi
New Delhi.
PAN AQ KPS8457P
Revenue by Sh. Dr Rakesh Gupta,
Sh. Som ill Agraw al,
Sh. Tarun, advocates
Assessee by Sh. Ashim a Neb, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing 19/7/2019
Date of Pronouncem ent 19/7/2019
ORDER
PER K. NARSIM HA CHARY. J.M.
By w ay of this Stay Application, assessee is seeking stay of
outstanding dem and to the tune of Rs. 23, 80, 575/-. Case of the assessee is
relating to the addition made by the learned AO and assessing the incom e of the
assessee at a Rs. 1, 12, 56, 370/- as against the returned incom e of Rs. 17, 92,
770/- and in spite of subm itting the valid reasons for deletion of the same,
learned CIT(A) confirm ed the same. It is further subm itted that out of the total
demand of Rs. 39, 47, 740/-, which shall include the tax com ponent of Rs. 29,
24, 252/- and interest of Rs. 10, 23, 488/-, the assessee had already paid a sum
of Rs. 15, 67, 165 /- and the outstanding is only a sum of Rs. 23, 80, 575/-.
2
2. It is the subm ission on behalf of the assessee that the assessee is an old
lady of 78 years of age and she has got an excellent prima facie case in view of
the fact that the assessm ent order was barred by lim itation inasm uch as the
search was conducted on 28/7/2011 and lim itation under section 153B of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") expense by 31/3/2014 whereas the
impugned assessm ent order was passed on 02/03/2015. It is further submitted
that the jew ellery received by the assessee on many as species occasions was
covered by the disclosure jew ellery as per the wealth tax return and the
protective addition is to the tune of Rs. 45, 6 2 ,432/-qua which a recovery cannot
be enforced.
3. It is further subm itted on behalf of the assessee that an am ount of Rs. 15,
67, 165/-which constitutes about 39.69% of total demand has already been
com plied with and the learner learned Assessing Officer issued letter dated
28/02/2019 requesting the assessee to file an affidavit of no objection to adjust
the seized am ount of Rs. 5.50 Lacs from the balance of 3 persons from whose
prem ises the am ount was seized, and the assessee is ready to file such an
affidavit. Insofar as irreparable loss is concerned, assessee being an old Hindu
wom an has sentim ent and attachm ent with the jew ellery that was presented to
her on auspicious occasions, and if no stay is granted, as indicated by the learned
Assessing Officer in the letter dated 26/6/2019, such jew ellery would be sold
and it would cause a rude shock to hire sentim ent and rights.
4. In so far as this factual subm ission is concerned, there is no denial from
the other side. Ld. DR subm itted that the am ount of Rs. 5.5 Lacs in respect of
which the assessee is ready to file the affidavit was seized from the prem ises of
which 3 other persons were also owners. However, the fact rem ains that the
learned Assessing Officer issued such a notice dated 28/02/2019 asking the
S'--
3
affidavit of the assessee to file no objection for adjusting the sam e in the case
of late Sh. BL Saw hney.
5. Be that as it may, the fact rem ains that as on the date out of the total
demand of Rs. 39, 47, 740/-, the assessee made paym ent of Rs. 15, 6 7 ,165/-and
it constitutes about 40% of the total dem and. Stay of the outstanding is sought
on the ground that there is a strong prima facie case in view of the legal plea
taken by the assessee and balance of convenience in their favour and if the stay
is not granted, it w ould cause irreparable loss and injury affecting badly the
sentim ent of an old Hindu w om an with the jew ellery that is proposed to be sold.
6. Having regard to the facts and circum stances surrounding this case, we
are convinced that it is a fit case to grant stay of enforcem ent of the outstanding
demand for a period of 6 m onths or the disposal of appeal, w hichever is earlier
with the rid e rth a tth e assessee shall always be read yto proceed with the matter
on merits. Further, in view of the grant of this stay, we deem it necessary to
dispose of this appeal at the earliest possible tim e, as such, we direct the
Registry to fix it out of turn on 23/9/2019. Since the next date of hearing is
announced in the open court in the knowledge of the counsel of either side, no
fresh notice need be issued.
7. In the result, Stay Application is allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 19/7/2019.
Dated: 19/7/2019
vj
|
