9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue by: Shri Neelima Nadkarni, D.R. ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: By virtue of these Stay Applications, the assessee seeks the stay of outstanding demands for two AY 2014-15 and 2015-16 of Rs. 2,46,34,402/- and Rs. 97,95,814/- respectively. 2. The Ld. AR submitted before the bench that the income tax demands raised for two years are as a result of additions made on account of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mes Pvt. Ltd vs. Dy. CIT [2017 (12) TMI 1216]. The Ld. AR submitted that the assesse is not having any funds to pay the outstanding demands and the bank accounts of the assessee are even attached by the department. The Ld. AR submitted that in case, the stay is not granted to the assessee, it would cause irreparable loss to the existence of the project and successful completion of the project woul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utstanding for two years are Rs. 2,46,34,402/- and Rs. 97,95,814/- respectively. The assessee is engaged in the business of construction of flats and the project of the assessee is substantially incomplete. We observe that survey was conducted on the assessee on 24/09/2014 u/s 133A and some loose sheets were found which we became the basis for addition in these two years on account of own money. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding demand of AY 2014-15 and the case of the assessee is also fixed for hearing on out of turn basis on 03/06/2019. The assessee is directed not to take adjournment without any reasonable cause failing which the stay would be subject to review by the bench hearing the case. The issue of notice is dispensed with as both the parties are informed in the open court. 5. In the result, the Stay Applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
