IN INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI Before Shri Abraham P. George, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member S.P.No. 221/Mds/2016 [In I.T.A.No.2657/Mds/2016 /Assessment Year :2011-12 Shri A. Vinod Kumar Reddy, Deputy Commissioner of 4th Floor, Bay Watch Apartments, Vs. Income Tax, No. 92/93, Coastal Road, Business Circle II, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. Chennai. [PAN: ABOPV6636N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate /Respondent by : Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT Date of hearing : 14.10.2016 /Date of Pronouncement : 14.10.2016 ORDER PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This stay petition is filed by assessee seeking stay from recovery of outstanding demand of .1,36,66,004/- till final disposal of appeal filed by assessee for assessment year 2011-12. 2. ld. Counsel for assessee, by relying on stay petition of petitioner, has submitted that petitioner has filed return on 25.01.2013 admitting total income of .28,37,544/- and has shown credit of 2 S.P. No.221/M/16 .4,75,10,880/- being profit on sale of agricultural lands, which was directly credited to capital account without routing this profit on sale of land through profit and loss account. Therefore, by holding that transaction as adventure in nature of trade, Assessing Officer brought to tax entire profit of .4,75,10,880/- as profit from business of assessee. On appeal, ld. CIT(A) dismissed appeal of assessee. He further submitted that against total demand of tax and interest of .2,68,39,077/-, petitioner has already paid .1,31,73,074/- and also got fair chance to win his case before Tribunal. 3. Before us, ld. Counsel for assessee has submitted that there is prima facie case in appeal and prayed that stay may be granted till final disposal of appeal. 4. On other hand, ld. DR has objected to grant stay. 5. We have heard both sides and perused records. We find that against order of ld. CIT(A), petitioner has filed appeal before Tribunal, which was posted for hearing on 14.12.2016. In this case, as submitted by assessee, outstanding demand was .2,68,39,077/- against which, petitioner has already paid .1,31,73,074/-. Since ld. Counsel for assessee has strongly pleaded that there is prima facie case in favour of assessee, we grant stay of recovery of balance outstanding amount upto three months from date of this order or till disposal of 3 S.P. No.221/M/16 appeal, whichever is earlier on condition that assessee shall pay .10,00,000/- within four weeks from date of this order and produce necessary receipt before Registry. stay petition of assessee is disposed off accordingly. Order pronounced on 14th October, 2016 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 14.10.2016 Vm/- Copy to: 1. Appellant, 2. Respondent, 3. CIT(A), 4. CIT, 5. DR & 6. GF. A. Vinod Kumar Reddy v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Business Circle-II, Chennai