← All Phrases

“stay of demand”

AppealsSection 220(6) / 254Section 220(6) / 254105 judgments

RAM NATH JAISWAL,FAIZABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes while the Stay application is held to be allowed

ITA 13/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Akash Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

application had not been filed before the Revenue authorities due to the lack of knowledge with regard to the same. The request for stay of demand was being made due to genuine hardship because compelling payment of a disputed demand when the matter was under a bonafide contest would ... finalization of the order of the ld. first appellate authority, the assessee may approach the Revenue authorities for further extension of the stay of demand till the time of disposal of appeal. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes while the Stay application

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2079/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

stay recovery proceedings till the appeal was heard and determined. Assessee claims itself an ISO 9001-2000 Company. With regard to stay of demand, Assessee's C.A. had appeared before the CIT(A)-10, Mumbai as evident from the order of the Commissioner dated 12.11.2008,In his order, he held ... appellants of the case of Ramnath Sao (supra). Besides, the assessee was aware that the CBDT has issued instruction with regard to stay of demand. Assessee, a corporate-assessee, filing returns of income of lacs of Rupees and assisted by highly qualified professionals cannot take shadow of umbrella of ignorance

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2050/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

stay recovery proceedings till the appeal was heard and determined. Assessee claims itself an ISO 9001-2000 Company. With regard to stay of demand, Assessee's C.A. had appeared before the CIT(A)-10, Mumbai as evident from the order of the Commissioner dated 12.11.2008,In his order, he held ... appellants of the case of Ramnath Sao (supra). Besides, the assessee was aware that the CBDT has issued instruction with regard to stay of demand. Assessee, a corporate-assessee, filing returns of income of lacs of Rupees and assisted by highly qualified professionals cannot take shadow of umbrella of ignorance

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,, BARODA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 903/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: The Itat. Considering The Same, The Order Passed By Itat Was Recalled & The Appeal Of The Assessee Fixed For Adjudication Afresh On Merits, Vide Order In Ma No.94/Ahd/2025, Dated 18.12.2025. The Present Appeal, Accordingly, Has Come Up For Hearing Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT.DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

orders, dated 24.07.2008, accordingly, Company made the necessary payment on 27.08.2008. The details of the same, alongwith the balance outstanding are as under: Stay of Demand of Demand payable as Balance Rs. (in Rs.) per the condition laid outstanding (in Rs.) down by Hon’ble High Court

NEERAJ JAISWAL AND OTHERS,BAREILLY vs. ACIT-1, BAREILLY

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/LKW/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2020-21 & ( S.A. No.08/Lkw/2025) In Ita. No.33/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year 2020-21 Neeraj Jaiswal & Others Vs. The Acit-1 Green Park, Bareilly-243001. ‘C.R. Building’, Kamla Nehru Marg, Civil Lines, Bareilly-243001. Tan/Pan:Aaaan4041K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 68

submitted that this factual report had been obtained by the ld. Pr. CIT, while considering the assessee’s request for stay of demand. It was submitted that vide this factual report dated 29.02.2024, submitted by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bareilly, party-wise description

PRINGALKUMAR PRAVEENBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

ITA 2365/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Umedsingh Bhati & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR
Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69C

that the assessee had chosen to file a writ petition against the same to the Hon’ble High Court who had fairly directed stay of demand but the matter could not be taken up for hearing on merits for a considerable period of time and, therefore, the assessee had withdrawn

ITRON INDIA P.LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1235/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalitron India P. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Flat No. 507, Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Bhikajicamabhawan, C. R. Building, New Delhi Bhikajicama Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabcs6575L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh.Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is 12 Itron

LS CABLE INDIA P.LTD.,REWARI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-5, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 4665/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

LS CABLE INDIA PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1961/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

SIME DARBY ENGINEERING SDN BHD,DELHI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 9/DDN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

NATIONAL OIL WELL VARCO PTE. LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VARCO INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD),MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ), DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 5/DDN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

SIME DARBY ENGINEERING SDNBHD,MALAYSIA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 40/DDN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO PTE. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VARCO INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 419/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

SIME DARBY ENGINEERING SDN BHD,GURGAON vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 7616/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CI9RCLE-2, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 5898/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1557/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO PTE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1675/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

PERFETTI VAN MELLE INDIA PVT LT.D,GURGOAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5389/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

ATHENA HISAR SOLAR POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5372/DEL/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Athena Hisar Solar Power Pvt. Vs Dcit, Assessment Unit, Ltd., J5/132, Rajouri Garden, Civic Centre, E-2, Delhi-110027 Delhi Pan-Aaoca5969P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Salil Kapoor Adv. & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Dated 26.09.2024 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Raised Ground No. 2 Contending That The Final Assessment Order Dated 26.09.2024 Passed By The A.O. Is Time Barred By Limitation & Is Bad In Law, As It Has Been Passed Beyond The Time Frame Prescribed Under Section 153(1) Read With Section 153(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' For Short). The Ld. Assessee'S Representative Relying On The Ratio Laid Down By The Hon'Ble High Court Of Madras In The Case Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Athena Hisar Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 537 (Madras) & Also Plethora Of Orders Passed By The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench Sought For Allowing The Ground No. 2 Of The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5199/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd., 5Th Floor, C/O Regus Circle-13(1) Business Center, Gurgaon C.R. Building, Delhi Road, South West Delhi- 110037. Pan-Aaacj2919A Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Sumit Mangal, Adv. Ms. Radhika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Soumya Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Dated 23.10.2024 Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. During The Course Of Hearing The Bench Has Asked The Assessee To File Specific Ground Of Appeal No.2 As Against General Ground Of Appeal No. 2 Taken. In Compliance, Assessee Vide Application Dt. 12.03.2025 Filed Under Rule 11 Of The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 Raised Additional Ground Of Appeal Under. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Taken Reads As Under: Johnson Matthey India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

assessee. It is a matter of record in several cases where Roca Bathroom has been relied upon by assessees that either (1) stay of demand has been granted by the Tribunal, or (ii) the Assessing Officers are not pressing for coercive recovery during pendency. Therefore, the assessee is adequately protected

Showing 1–20 of 105 · Page 1 of 6