K.K. ANILKUMAR vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/18652/2024HC KeralaKLHC01108213202424 May 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN5 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 3rd respondent (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P5) expeditiously, and in any event, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery steps pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be deferred until the stay petition is disposed of. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, but rather addressed the procedural aspect of the pending stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K.K. Anilkumar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging recovery steps initiated pursuant to an assessment order (Ext.P1). The petitioner had previously filed an appeal (Ext.P2) against the assessment order before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent), which was dismissed by Ext.P3 order. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a further appeal (Ext.P4) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with a stay petition (Ext.P5), before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent). The petitioner's primary grievance was that recovery steps were being pursued despite the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to consider and dispose of the stay petition expeditiously, pending the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner? The petitioner contended that recovery steps were being initiated while their appeal against the assessment order was pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. They sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay petition. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not appear to have raised any specific arguments against the petitioner's prayer for a direction to the Tribunal. The judgment records that the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent were heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 18652 OF 2024 PETITIONER: K.K. ANILKUMAR AGED 51 YEARS, S/o ONAKKAN, “KAILAS”, THIKKODI, PAYYOLI, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 522. BY ADVS. R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA ACHYUTH MENON PADMANATHAN K.V. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN – 110 001. 2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)/ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, PIN – 110 001. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, C-I & C-II, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 037, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD 2(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, WP(C) NO. 18652 OF 2024 : 2 : INCOME TAX OFFICE, SOUTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 001. BY ADVS. KEERTHIVAS GIRI SRI. P.G. JAYASHANKAR - STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 18652 OF 2024 : 3 :

JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The same was dismissed vide Ext.P3 order. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appeal under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 along with Ext.P5 stay petition, before the 3rd respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that, pending Ext.P4 appeal, recovery steps are initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order.

Heard Sri. P.G. Jayashankar, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent. Ext.P4 is a statutory appeal. There will be a WP(C) NO. 18652 OF 2024 : 4 : direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 stay petition, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Till such time, recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be deferred. The writ petition is disposed of. MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SRJ

WP(C) NO. 18652 OF 2024 : 5 :

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18652/2024 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DTD. 29-03-2022. Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 30-04-2022. Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 28-02-2024. Exhibit P4 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 25-03-2024. Exhibit P5 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD, 27-03-2024. Exhibit P6 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 07-05-2024. Exhibit P7 COPY OF ORDER IN WPC NO.29879/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 29-09-2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →