Indian National Congress v. Dy. CIT (2024) 298 Taxman 630 /463 ITR 182/337 CTR 802 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 254(2A): Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Political parties-Denial of exemption-Rejection of stay by the Tribunal-Tribunal is justified in rejecting the stay application. [S. 13A(2), 226, Art. 226]

Assessee, a political party, registered under section 29A of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and recognised as such by the Election Commission of India claimed exemption under section 13A.  Assessing Officer denied said exemption on ground that assessee had violated provisions of section 13A(2) by not filing its return of income within time prescribed under section 139(4B). Assessing Officer also held that assessee had violated section 13A(2)(d) as it had received donations in cash in excess of Rs. 2,000. An order of assessment was passed and in terms of which demand notice was issued. In meanwhile, challenging order of assessment, assessee moved Commissioner (Appeals) and more particularly moved an application for stay of recovery of demand before Assessing Officer  That application came to be disposed of by Assessing Officer with a direction to assessee to deposit 20 per cent of outstanding tax liability. Assessee admittedly failed to comply with aforesaid condition as imposed by Assessing Officer. Appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) also came to be dismissed.  Thereafter, assessee filed an appeal before Tribunal. During pendency of said appeal, Assessing Officer proceeded to issue demand notices under section 226(3). Assessee  moved a stay application before Tribunal in its pending appeal.Tribunal rejected stay application.  Assessee not having accepted opportunity of a final hearing on appeal and there being number of adjournments which were sought at behest of assessee on different dates, Tribunal was justified in rejecting stay application. However, an amount of Rs. 65.94 crores i.e. 48 per cent of outstanding demand having been recovered in interregnum by encashing bank drafts would merit consideration by Tribunal in case assessee chooses to move a fresh application for stay.  The Court dismissed the peritio n with liberty to the assessee to move fresh application for stay before the Tribunal in the light of the departments including that an amount of Rs. 65.94 crores had been recovered by the respondents pursuant to encashment of the bank drafts.  Circulars and Notifications: CBDT Office Memorandum No. 404/72/93-ITCC dated 31-7-2017 (2017) 396 ITR 55 (St)  and Instruction No. 1914 dated 21-3-1996. (AY. 2018-19)