2016 (7) TMI 1310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....but the appeals of the assessee could not be disposed of within a period of 180 days, therefore, on an application filed by assessee for seeking extension of stay the applications were fixed for hearing on 05.06.2015 and on that day the learned DR moved an application and the Stay Applications along with appeals were finally heard on 26.08.2015. It was further submitted that Hon'ble Judicial Member and Hon'ble Accountant Member took divergent views on the appeals and therefore, Hon'ble President of the Tribunal referred the matter to the Third Member. In the mean time the Tribunal vide order dated 03.02.2016 extended the stay earlier granted to the application for a period of 180 days observing that despite divergent view expressed by Hon'b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal is not attributable to the assessee and, in this respect, filed a copy of the order passed by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. Inviting our attention to the findings of the Hon'ble Court, the learned DR submitted that the Hon'ble Court has held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is not an authority akin to a Court but is a special Tribunal with limited jurisdiction, as indicated in the statutory provisions and for a precise purpose. 4. The learned AR, on the other hand, invited our attention to an order passed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Principal CIT, Gurgaon vs. M/s Carrier Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Limited in ITA No.5 of 2016, vide its order dated 25.05.2016, and submitted that the Hon'ble....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (ii) Whether the order of the ITAT be treated as void ab initio in the light of third proviso to section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides that stay of demand stands vacated after expiry of a period of 365 days even if delay in disposal of appeal is not attributable to the assessee ?" This question has been decided in Para-17 of order, which reads as under: "17. In view of the above, the question posed in para 5 above is answered in the affirmative. Accordingly, it would be concluded that wherever the appeal could not be decided by the Tribunal due to pressure of pendency of cases and the delay in disposal of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee in any manner, the interim protection can conti....