QUALITY MART vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/19630/2024HC KeralaKLHC01110583202431 May 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal (Ext.P3) as expeditiously as possible. If the delay is condoned, the 3rd respondent is further directed to consider the stay petition (Ext.P4) expeditiously. This entire process is to be completed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Crucially, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P2) shall be deferred until the aforementioned exercise is completed. The principle established is that statutory appeals and stay applications should be considered promptly, and recovery should be stayed pending such consideration to protect the assessee's rights.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Quality Mart, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P2) passed under Section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has filed a statutory appeal (Ext.P3) under Section 246A of the Act, along with an application for condonation of delay and a stay petition (Ext.P4). The petitioner's grievance is that recovery proceedings are being initiated for the disputed amount while the appeal and stay petition are pending before the appellate authority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should consider the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, expeditiously? 2. If the delay is condoned, whether the 3rd respondent should consider the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P4) expeditiously? Assessee's Contention: The assessee contends that recovery proceedings are being pursued while their statutory appeal and stay petition are pending, causing prejudice. They seek expeditious consideration of their applications. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues raised by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C) NO. 19630 OF 2024
TC 48/47

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 19630 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: QUALITY MART TC 48/471 5 6 7 TC 48/471 9 JUBILEE NAGAR, MANACAUD PO KALLATTUMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER ABDUL HACKIM, PIN - 695009 BY ADVS. K.P.PRADEEP T.T.BIJU T.THASMI M.J.ANOOPA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK , NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN - 110001 2 ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN – 110003 BY SC. SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).No.19630 OF 2024 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against Ext.P2 assessment order passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19 the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal under Section 246 A of the Act. The appeal has been filed along with an application for condonation of delay. The petitioner has also filed Ext.P4 stay petition.

2.

The grievance of the petitioner is that during the pendency of Ext.P3 appeal steps are being taken for realisation of the amount under Ext.P2. Since Ext.P3 is a statutory appeal, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider

W.P(C).No.19630 OF 2024 3 the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing Ext.P3 appeal, as expeditiously as possible. If the delay is condoned, the 3rd respondent shall consider Ext.P4 stay petition, as expeditiously as possible. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, the recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 shall be deferred. The writ petition is disposed of. MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-

W.P(C).No.19630 OF 2024 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19630/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX RETURN ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 01-03-2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-2019 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1061780166(1) DATED 29-02-2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 16-05-2024 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 BEFORE THE 3RDRESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 16- 05-2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO ITBA/AST/S/156/2023- 24/1061780225(1) DATED 29-02-2024 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO 491 OF 2024 DATED 05-04-2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE DIVISION BENCH

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →