IN INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI, BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.P.No.149 Mds 2016 [In I.T.A. No. 455 Mds 2016] Assessment Year:2011-12 M s. Durr India Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner of 471, Ground and Second Floor, Prestige Vs. Income Tax, Company Circle 1(1), Polygon, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 121, Nungambakkam High Road, 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACD3568P] ( Appellant) ( Respondent) Appellant by Shri Kapil Hirani Advocate & : Shri darpa Kirpalani, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Srinivasa Rao, CIT D.R Date of hearing : 27.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2016 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: By this stay petition, assessee seeks extension of stay granted to assessee vide order of Tribunal dated 04.03.2016 in S.P.No.59 Mds. 2016 (I.T.A. No. 455 Mds 2016 for A.Y 2011-12). 2. Ld. AR submitted that originally stay was granted to assessee vide order cited supra towards recovery of outstanding disputed amount of `6,50,41,590 - after considering prima facie case in favour of assessee 2 No.149 M M 16 S.P. No.149 M 16 and case was fixed for hearing on 19.04.2016. However, on 19.04.2016, Ld.D.R sought for adjournment and case was adjourned to 10.05.2016. On 10.05.2016, Ld. A.R was hospitalised and he was undergoing chemotherapy treatment during that period. After considering adjournment petition, Bench was kind enough to adjourn same to 19.07.2016. In meantime, assessee also filed Stay Petition on 30.06.2016 seeking extension of Stay. Stay Petition was fixed for hearing on 08.07.2016. However, on this day Stay Petition was adjourned and posted along with present appeal on 19.07.2016. On 19.07.2016, Ld.D.R sought for adjournment and case along with present Stay Petition was adjourned to 27.09.2016. 3. At time of hearing, Ld.A.R submitted that appeal for assessment year 2009-10 is also pending before this Tribunal on similar issue and DRP based their conclusion for present appeal for assessment year 2011-12 on basis of their conclusion in assessment year 2009-10. This impugned appeal for assessment year 2011-12 is required to be decided along with appeal for assessment year 2009-10 and he prayed that these two appeals to be clubbed together and heard together. He further pleaded that stay to be extended at least for period of three months during pendency of appeal. 4. On other hand, ld. D.R submitted that assessee may be asked to pay at least 50% of outstanding disputed demand of tax. 3 No.149 M M 16 S.P. No.149 M 16 5. We have heard both parties and perused records. contention of Ld.A.R is that on earlier occasion, case was not heard and it was adjourned on bona fide reasons. There is no fault from assessee s side. Further, this appeal for assessment year 2011-12 is required to be heard along with appeal relating to assessment year 2009-10. Accordingly, both these appeals are clubbed and posted for hearing on 27.10.2016. Stay, which is already granted in this case vide order dated 04.03.2016 in S.P No.59 Mds. 2016 is extended for further period of three months from date of this order, or till disposal of appeal whichever is earlier. No notice of hearing would be given to both parties. This order itself serves as notice to both parties. assessee shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment. With this observation, stay petition filed by assessee is disposed off. Order pronounced on 27th September, 2016 at Chennai. Sd - Sd - (G.PAVAN KUMAR) (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 27.09.2016 kssundaram Copy to: 1. Appellant, 2. Respondent, 3. CIT(A), 4. CIT, 5. DR & 6. GF. M/s. Durr India Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle 1(1), Chennai