2010 (6) TMI 857

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submitted that the Tribunal vide its order dated 11.12.2009 disposed off the stay applications Nos.224 to 226/Mum/2009 granting stay on recovery of outstanding demand u/s 201(1) subject to the condition of making a further payment of Rs. 1.50 crore. Thereafter interest was levied on the assessee u/s.201(1A) pursuant to the order passed by the CIT(A) in relation to order u/s.201(1). The assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) against the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.201(1A) and simultaneously made a request to the TDS Officer for keeping the demand in abeyance, which prayer was not accepted. The assessee filed an application before the Tribunal seeking clarification as to whether the order passed by it on 11.12.2009 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd both are to be considered independently without affecting the rights mentioned in either of the sub-sections. In the light of these judgments it was argued that the Tribunal was not justified in passing order on 26.2.2010 granting stay of demand u/s.201(1A) on the ground that interest u/s 201(1A) was consequential to the demand of tax u/s 201(1). He also placed on record a copy of the Miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue u/s.254(2) of the Act against the Tribunal's aforesaid order dated 26.2.2010. It was, therefore, prayed that no stay be granted in respect of interest u/s.201(1A). 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The facts of the case lie in narrow compartment inasmuch as t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot an independent order in itself but supplement to and continuation of the stay order dated 11.12.2009 inasmuch as recovery of consequential interest u/s.201(1A) has been granted "on the same term and for the same period as in the Tribunal's order granting stay of demand u/s.201(1)". It is not possible to view the addendum dated 26.2.2010 as an order having distinct identity independent of the order dated 11.12.2009. 6. We are not going into the merits of the arguments raised on behalf of the Revenue in the present round of proceedings qua the competency of the tribunal to grant stay in respect of a matter, being the demand created u/s 201(1A), which is not pending in appeal before it. Co-ordinate bench of the tribunal is not a proper f....