Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-77, New Delhi
[Citation -2019-LL-0927-84]

Citation 2019-LL-0927-84
Appellant Name Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-77, New Delhi
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 27/09/2019
Assessment Year 2015-16
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags outstanding amount • stay petition • stay of demand of tax • levy of penalty • non-deduction of tds • government agency • bona fide expenses
Bot Summary: The amount of the tax due i s on account of penal ty u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 l evi ed for non-deducti on of TDS u/s 194 of the Act for payme nt of EDC and IDC to HUDA. Duri ng the arguments before us, the l d. AR argued that the company is in di re fi nanci al crunch and the bal ance of conveni ence i s i n the favour on the i ssue of payment of EDC and IDC to HUDA under a bonfi de beli eve that the payments 2 SA No. 923/Del/2019 Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. are bei ng done to the Government agency pl eaded for stay of the demand. On the other hand, l d. DR the vehementl y opposed the argument of the l d. AR that th e i ssue of bonfi de payment cannot be examined duri ng the stay proceedi ngs. We fi nd that the assessee has prima facie case i n hi s favour and al ready pai d 20 of the demand rai sed. Keepi ng i n vi ew the CBDT Ci rcul ar No. F No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31 s t Jul y 2017, i ssued to t he fi el d authori ti es regardi ng the stay of demand, fi nanci al constrai nts and bal ance of conveni ence, we hereby grant st ay on the remai ni ng demand for a pe ri od of 180 days from the date of thi s order or till the di sposal of appeal whi chever i s earli er. In the result, the Stay Application of the assessees is allowed.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH Friday, NEW DELHI Before Ms. Sushma Chowla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member SA No. 923/Del/2019 (in ITA No. 6844/Del/2019 Asstt. Year 2015-16) Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income 302, 3rd Floor, Barakhamba Tax, Range-77, Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKCS2063E Assessee by Sh. Sunil Arora, CA Revenue by Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement 27.09.2019 ORDER Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member: foll owi ng amount i s outstanding and di sputed by assessee Tax 20,22,000 Already paid 4,14,500 Outstanding amount 16,07,500 2. amount of tax due i s on account of penal ty u/s 271C of Income Tax Act, 1961 l evi ed for non-deducti on of TDS u/s 194 of Act for payme nt of EDC and IDC to HUDA. Duri ng arguments before us, l d. AR argued that company is in di re fi nanci al crunch and bal ance of conveni ence i s i n favour on i ssue of payment of EDC and IDC to HUDA under bonfi de beli eve that payments 2 SA No. 923/Del/2019 Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. are bei ng done to Government agency, hence, pl eaded for stay of demand. 3. On other hand, l d. DR vehementl y opposed argument of l d. AR that th e i ssue of bonfi de payment cannot be examined duri ng stay proceedi ngs. 4. We fi nd that assessee has prima facie case i n hi s favour and al ready pai d 20% of demand rai sed. Hence, keepi ng i n vi ew CBDT Ci rcul ar No. F No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31 s t Jul y 2017, i ssued to t he fi el d authori ti es regardi ng stay of demand, fi nanci al constrai nts and bal ance of conveni ence, we hereby grant st ay on remai ni ng demand for pe ri od of 180 days from date of thi s order or till di sposal of appeal whi chever i s earli er. 5. In result, Stay Application of assessees is allowed. (Orde r Pronounced i n Open Court on 27/09/2019) Sd/- Sd/- (Sushma Chowla) (Dr. B.R.R. Kumar) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 27/09/2019 Copy forwarded to 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-77, New Delhi
Report Error