B.G. International Ltd. vs Assistant Director of Income Tax

Alok Singh, J.—Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that in Stay Application No. 106/Del/2014 in ITA No. 815/Del/2014, for the assessment year 2009-10, M/s. BG International Limited Vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax (International Taxation), Dehradun, learned ITAT vide order dated 21.02.2014 was pleased to grant stay staying recovery as mentioned in the order. Thereafter, interim order was extended by ITAT vide order dated 08.08.2014. Further contends that appeal involving identical questions of law for the assessment year 2007-08 was heard on 19th January, 2015 and judgment was reserved. Further contends that since judgment in the appeal of assessment year 2007-08 would decide the date of the present appeal, therefore, present appeal was not taken up for hearing. However, present appeal is now fixed for hearing on 16th February, 2015.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that assessee petitioner herein never caused any delay in the disposal of the appeal nor shall seek adjournment in future, therefore, if appeal could not be heard and disposed of within the statutory period for no fault of the assessee/petitioner, petitioner should not be harassed by asking to pay the disputed amount of tax.

Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned counsel for the revenue respondent submits that he shall file counter affidavit demonstrating that all the conditions imposed by the Tribunal, while granting stay, were not complied with by the assessee/petitioner and he shall also point out that delay in disposal of the appeal was caused only because of the assessee/petitioner.

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks from today as prayed by learned counsel for the respondent.

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within three weeks thereafter.

Since appeal is fixed for hearing before the Tribunal on 16th February, 2015, therefore, I direct that meanwhile learned Tribunal shall explore every possibility to decide the Appeal, in question, at its own merit in accordance with law either on the date fixed itself or within thirty days thereafter.

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that till the next date of listing of the present petition, recovery of the disputed amount shall not be insisted upon.

CLMA No. 1009 of 2015 sands disposed of accordingly.