MWH India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT-9(2), Mumbai
[Citation -2016-LL-0916-55]
| Citation | 2016-LL-0916-55 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | MWH India Pvt. Ltd. |
| Respondent Name | Dy. CIT-9(2), Mumbai |
| Court | ITAT-Mumbai |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 16/09/2016 |
| Assessment Year | 2009-10 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | outstanding demand • stay petition |
| Bot Summary: | The assessee vide its application dated 03.08.2016 has now sought an amendment in the order afore-said in-as-much as the tribunal has not specifically directed for the payment of Rs.100 lacs out of the sums held in the assessee s attached bank account s. It is prayed that such a direction be 2 SA No. 233 Mum 2016 MWH India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT given in-as-much as the Revenue is insisting on the said payment from funds other than that already attached by it and, further, the date of payment be also extended as the same could not, for the said reason, be made yet. We may firstly clarify that we find no error as such in the tribunal s order, which contained a direction to the assessee to pay the amount stated, and not to the Revenue to recover the same, which though would be obliged not to recover any further sum upon satisfaction of the conditions for the grant of stay. This is as while hearing the stay petition, the tribunal was inclined to vacate the attachment, i.e., on satisfaction of the conditions for grant of stay. Sr. Counsel explained that this may not be feasible as the said attachment is also in respect of the disputed demand for another year, i.e., A.Y. 2007- 08, stay in respect of which was carried to the Hon ble High Court before which the Revenue has undertaken not to take any coercive measure for recovery, so that a status quo as regards the attachment may continue. We make it clear that the payment of Rs.100 lacs directed vide our order dated 22.7.2016 could be made, at the option of the assessee-company, from the attached bank account s as well. Further, the time limit for the said payment is extended to 30.9.2016, which in fact would assume significance where and to the extent the payment is made from other than the attached bank account s. This we believe would meet the assessee s request. The assessee s application for modification of the captioned stay order is disposed of accordingly. |