2018 (2) TMI 880

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd W.P.No.55606/2017. 2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to as per their status in the writ petitions. 3. Heard Shri Deepak Chopra, learned Counsel for appellant and Shri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. 4. Before the Hon'ble Single Judge, petitioner challenged a common order dated 08.12.2017 passed in Stay Petition No.271/Bang/2017 in ITA No.69/Bang/2014 and connected matters passed by the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench 'C', Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). By the said order, the Tribunal, while extending interim orders of stay, directed petitioner to deposit additional sums towards outstanding tax demands in respect of assessment years in questio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decide such appeal within a period of four years from the end of the financial year in which such appeal is filed under sub-section (1) [or subsection (2)] of section 253: Provided that the Appellate Tribunal may, after considering the merits of the application made by the assessee, pass an order of stay in any proceedings relating to an appeal filed under sub-section (1) of section 253, for a period not exceeding one hundred and eighty days from the date of such order and the Appellate Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal within the said period of stay specified in that order: Provided further that where such appeal is not so disposed of within the said period of stay as specified in the order of stay, the Appellate Tribunal may, on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... third proviso to Section 254 (2A), mandates that the period or periods extended under the second proviso shall not exceed 365 days and the order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of such period or periods, even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee. 12. It is not in dispute that for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11, petitioner has deposited about 50% of the tax demands. For the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, it has deposited about 30% of the tax demands. 13. The Hon'ble Single Judge has recorded a finding that the Tribunal, while passing orders under Section 254 (2A) has followed this Court's order dated 22.11.2017 in Writ Petitions No.52358-52359/2017, wherein, petitioner w....