The assessee has filed the above stay applications seeking stay of outstanding demand . The assessee has already made payment of substantial amount of outstanding demand   The Tribunal held that, (i) The term “recovery” is comprehensive and includes adjustment thereby reducing the demand; (ii) It will be specious & illogical for the Revenue to contend that if an issue is decided in favour of the assessee giving rise to a refund in an earlier year, that refund can be adjusted u/s 245, on account of the demand on the same issue in a subsequent year (iii) The decisions of CIT(A) & Tribunal in favour of the assessee should not be ignored, (iv) Income-tax officials are officers of the State and the Law requires that they perform their duties with utmost objectivity and fairness, while keeping in mind the sanctity of the role and function assigned to them which at times requires tough steps (Maruti Suzuki Ltd 347 ITR 47 (Del) followed) . Accordingly the stay was granted .(SP Nos.267 to 270 & 272/Bang/2019, dt. 14.10.2019)(AY. 2010-11 to 2013-14.)