Stay of penalty recovery requires relief from the authority seized of the appeal, not the Tribunal when the appeal is elsewhere.

The ITAT Delhi-B noted that its stay power extends to recovery of disputed amounts in appeals pending before it, but it found no support for using that power where the penalty appeals were pending before the first appellate authority. It also observed that the first appellate authority had inherent jurisdiction to stay recovery in matters before it, and the assessee had not sought relief there. On that basis, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the authority seized of the penalty appeals and refused to grant stay of recovery of the penalty demands.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could stay recovery of penalty demands arising under section 271(1)(a) and section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act when the penalty appeals were pending before the first appellate authority.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that while it had power to stay recovery of amounts that were in dispute in an appeal pending before it, no authority supported extending that power to amounts involved in appeals pending before the first appellate authority. It further noted that the first appellate authority itself had inherent jurisdiction to stay recovery in matters pending before it, and the assessee had not approached that authority for relief. The Tribunal therefore declined to exercise any such power in a manner that would interfere with the jurisdiction of the authority actually seized of the penalty appeals.

Conclusion: The Tribunal had no reason to grant stay of recovery of the penalty demands, and the request was rejected.

---