Wp/3389/2019 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal "J" Bench And Anr

Priya Soparkar 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3389 OF 2019 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7… PetitionerV/s. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,“J” Bench, Mumbai and anr.… Respondents --- Mr.N.C.Mohanty, Advocate for the Petitioner.Mr.Mohamedali M. Chunawala, Advocate for RespondentNo.1.Mr.Madhur Agarwal with Mr.A.K.Jasani, Advocate forRespondent No.2. --- CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 24, 2020 P.C.:- 1.Heard Mr.N.C.Mohanty, learned standing counsel,Revenue for the petitioner; and Mr.Madhur Agarwal,learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2.In this petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, Principal Commissioner of IncomeTax-7, Mumbai as the petitioner has assailed legality andvalidity of the order dated 15[th] March, 2019 passed by the Priya Soparkar 2910 wp 3389-19-o Income Tax appellate Tribunal, "J" Bench, Mumbai (briefly“the Tribunal” hereinafter) in Miscellaneous ApplicationNo.143/Mum/2019 arising out of SA No.453/Mum/2018for the assessment year 2011-12, whereby theapplication filed by the revenue for vacation/ recall ofthe stay order was dismissed by the Tribunal. 3.Be it stated that respondent No.2 i.e. the assesseehas preferred Income Tax Appeal No.850/Mumbai/ 2016and in that appeal it had filed a stay application being SANo.453/Mumbai/2018. Tribunal passed an order on 4[th]December, 2018 granting stay of the orders of therevenue authorities. For vacating the stay order revenuehad preferred the miscellaneous application. By theimpugned order dated 15[th]March, 2019, themiscellaneous application was rejected. 4.Basic grievance of the revenue is that Tribunal hasno jurisdiction to extend the stay order beyond a periodof 365 days. In the present case, Tribunal has been Priya Soparkar 3910 wp 3389-19-o extending the stay order from time to time which hasexceeded the aforesaid period. 5.On the other hand, Mr.Agarwal, learned counsel forrespondent No.2 submits that the stay order passed on4[th] December, 2018 has elapsed by efflux of timewhereafter Tribunal has passed a fresh order whichrevenue has not brought on record. 6.After hearing learned counsel for the parties and ondue consideration, we are of the view that it would be inthe interest of justice if the appeal itself is taken up forfinal disposal by the Tribunal expeditiously. 7.Accordingly, we direct the Tribunal to hear anddecide Income Tax Appeal No.850/Mum/2016 for theassessment year 2011-12 within a period of four monthsfrom the date of receipt of an authenticated copy of thisorder. Stay granted by the Tribunal shall continue till thedisposal of the appeal within the aforesaid period. 8.Writ petition is disposed of. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) ….