“stay of demand”

Manlift India Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 16(3), New Delhi

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

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

Delta Electronics India Private Limited, Gurgaon, Haryana vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1), Gurgaon, Haryana

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

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

Avaya India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Not Available

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

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

Airbnb India Private Limited, Delhi, India vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Central Revenue Building, Delhi, India

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalairbnb India Private Limited, Dcit, Circle-1(1), 5Th Floor, Caddie Commercial Central Revenue Building, Tower, Aerocity, Vs. Delhi. New Delhi-110037. Pan-Aakca5525B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Reema Grewal, Ca Department By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By Ao Dated 24.07.2024 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. & 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Subsequent To The Direction Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Vide Direction Dated 27.06.2024. 2. The Assessee Raised Ground No. 2 Contending That The Final Assessment Order Dated 24/07/2024 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. Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 537 (Madras) & Also Airbnb India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito Plethora Of Orders Passed By The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench Sought For Allowing The Ground No. 2 Of The Assessee.

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

Motorola Solutions India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

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

Avaya India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Not Available

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

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

record in several Avaya India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. A.O./NFAC 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

Airbnb Payments India Private Limited, Gurugram, Haryana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Gurugram, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalairbnb Payments India Private Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Gurugram, Haryana. Level 9, Spaze I Tech Park, Vs A1 Tower, Sector-49, . Sohna Road, Gurugram-122018 Haryana. Pan-Aanca6203B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Reema Grewal, Ca Department By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By Ao Dated 18.07.2024 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Subsequent To The Direction Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Vide Direction Dated 24.06.2024. 2. The Assessee Raised Ground No. 2 Contending That The Final Assessment Order Dated 18/07/2024 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 Airbnb Payments India Private Limited Vs. Dcit The Ratio Laid Down By The Hon'Ble High Court Of Madras In The Case Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 Itr 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.

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

At and T Communication Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Office of ACIT, Cr Building, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

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

Valvoline Cummins Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

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

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

Claas Agricultural Machinery Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

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

Itron India Private Limited, Noida vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalitron India Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner C-7, Sector-3, Noida Gautam Of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh C. R. Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aabcs6575L New Delhi 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 21/01/2026

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

Xl India Business Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

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

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

Lintec India Private Limited, South Delhi, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1), Office of DCIT, Cr Building, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwallintec India Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 14Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Income Tax, Circle 13(1), Nehru Place, South Delhi, Delhi Office Of The Dcit, C. R. 110019, Building, Delhi Pan: Aaccl23772F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Supriya Mehta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

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

Al Maha Foods International Private Limited, New Delhi vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (Jao - DCIT Circle 1(1), Delhi), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalal Maha Foods International Vs National Faceless Private Limited, 1122, Dlf Assessment Centre (Jao- Tower A, Jasola, New Friends Dcit Circle 1(1), C. R. Colony, S.O. Zakir Nagar, Building, I. P. Estate, Delhi Delhi-110025 New Delhi Pan: Aabca8743L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv& Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

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

Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalteva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Vs Assessment Unit, Income Industries India Private Limited, Tax Department/Deputy 8Th Floor, C-Wing Time Square, Commissioner Of Income Andherikurla Road, Marol Naka, Tax, Circle 25(1), Opp Mittal Industrial Estate C. R. Building, Delhi- Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059, 110001 Maharashtra, India Pan: Bnspk7225H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Sohamdua, Adv& Sh. Abhiudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: 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.

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

Vikas Jain, Noida vs. ACIT, CC-7, Delhi

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

8436/Del/2025 2022-23 24.10.2025 30.03.2024 2. At the time of hearing of the Stay Application filed in these appeals seeking stay of demands for respective assessment years involved, it was found that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) were made in the absence of any submissions ... afresh adjudication. 7. The Ld. AR, however, submitted that direction be given to the Ld. First Appellate Authority below to revive the stay of demand. We find that the Ld. PCIT, Central Delhi-1, vide order dated 07.01.2025, had granted the stay of recovery proceedings pending disposal of the appeal

Vikas Jain, Noida vs. ACIT, CC-7, Delhi

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

8436/Del/2025 2022-23 24.10.2025 30.03.2024 2. At the time of hearing of the Stay Application filed in these appeals seeking stay of demands for respective assessment years involved, it was found that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) were made in the absence of any submissions ... afresh adjudication. 7. The Ld. AR, however, submitted that direction be given to the Ld. First Appellate Authority below to revive the stay of demand. We find that the Ld. PCIT, Central Delhi-1, vide order dated 07.01.2025, had granted the stay of recovery proceedings pending disposal of the appeal

Vikas Jain, Noida vs. ACIT, CC-7, Delhi

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

8436/Del/2025 2022-23 24.10.2025 30.03.2024 2. At the time of hearing of the Stay Application filed in these appeals seeking stay of demands for respective assessment years involved, it was found that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) were made in the absence of any submissions ... afresh adjudication. 7. The Ld. AR, however, submitted that direction be given to the Ld. First Appellate Authority below to revive the stay of demand. We find that the Ld. PCIT, Central Delhi-1, vide order dated 07.01.2025, had granted the stay of recovery proceedings pending disposal of the appeal