RAJKUMAR GOLECHA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMI. OF INCOME TAX and ORS

WMAP/104/2018HC RajasthanRJHC01005140201819 April 20183 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the misc. applications with a direction that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners for recovery of the amount until the final disposal of the appeal. The Court clarified that the Appellate Authority shall pass the final order expeditiously, as the final arguments had already taken place and only the final order was to be passed. The reasoning was that it would be unjust to take coercive steps when the appeal was at the stage of final order, and the petitioners had not caused any delay. The principle established is that coercive recovery actions should be stayed when an appeal is pending final pronouncement after arguments have been concluded, to prevent injustice.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Rajkumar Golecha and Smt. Vinita Devi Golecha, filed writ petitions seeking a stay on recovery proceedings for an income tax demand. On March 15, 2018, the High Court disposed of these petitions with a direction that no coercive action would be taken against the petitioners for recovery of the demand until March 31, 2018, provided the appeal was concluded by that date. If the appeal was not decided by March 31, 2018, the stay would automatically stand vacated. The petitioners subsequently filed misc. applications for modification of this order, alleging that despite the appeal arguments being heard and the matter listed for final order, the respondents had attached their bank accounts. They argued that it would be unjust to take coercive steps at this stage.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents can take coercive steps for recovery of the income tax demand when the appeal is pending final order, despite the High Court's previous order granting a stay until March 31, 2018, and the appeal arguments having been concluded. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the respondents had proceeded to attach their bank accounts despite the appeal arguments being heard and the matter being listed for final order. They contended that it would be highly unjust to effect recovery by taking coercive steps at this stage, as they had not delayed the decision of the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the attachment of bank accounts or their right to take coercive steps at this stage.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Writ Misc Application No. 104 / 2018 Rajkumar Golecha S/o Labh Chand Ji, Aged About 43 Years, Resident of Gundochya Baas, Pali Marwar ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Department, Jodhpur. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Department, Central Circle-2 Jodhpur. 3. Commissioner of Incom Tax (Appeal), Central Udaipur. 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 Jodhpur. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Writ Misc Applicatio No. 105 / 2018 Smt. Vinita Devi Golecha W/o Rajkumar Golecha, Aged About 42 Years, Resident of Gundochya Baas, Pali Marwar ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Department, Jodhpur. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Department, Central Circle-2 Jodhpur. 3. Commissioner of Incom Tax (Appeal), Central Udaipur. 4. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 Jodhpur. ----Respondents _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sandeep Bhandawat, Adv. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR

Order

(2 of 3) [WMAP-104/2018]

19/04/2018

The present misc. applications have been filed for modification of the order dated 15th March, 2018. On 15th March, 2018, the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the appeal is being heard and shall definitely be concluded by 31st March, 2018. In view of the said statement, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ petitions with a direction that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners for recovery of the demand uptill 31st March, 2018. In case, the said appeal in not decided by 31st March, 2018, the stay granted by this Court shall be deemed to have been automatically vacated and the respondents will be at liberty to recover the said amount thereafter.” It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in spite of the entire arguments on appeal having been heard, the matter having been listed for final order, the respondents have proceeded to attach the bank accounts. The petitioners have not delayed the decision of the appeal in any manner and the final order is awaited. Hence, it would highly unjust, in case, the recovery is effected from the petitioners by taking coercive steps at the stage of final order. Accordingly, this Court deems it proper to disposed of the present applications with the direction that till as such time of the final disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners for recovery of the amount. It is, however, clarified that the Appellate Authority shall pass the final order as (3 of 3) [WMAP-104/2018]

expeditiously as possible since the final arguments have already been taken place and only the final order has to be passed. (NIRMALJIT KAUR), J. NK/70-71

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →