Viswaprakash Educational and Charitable Trust vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/27922/2023HC KeralaKLHC01061226202322 August 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and dispose of the delay petition filed along with the appeal (Ext.P2) and the stay petition (Ext.P3) in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The petitioner was to be afforded an opportunity of being heard. The Court also stipulated that if a conditional order of stay was proposed, the reasons for it must be stated. Crucially, until orders were passed on the stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) were deferred. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the assessment order itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Viswaprakash Educational and Charitable Trust, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner was aggrieved by an assessment order (Ext.P1). To challenge this order, the petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P2) along with a delay petition before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), on April 19, 2023. Subsequently, a stay petition (Ext.P3) was filed on April 21, 2023. The petitioner apprehended enforcement of the assessment order during the pendency of the stay petition and therefore sought a direction for expeditious disposal of the delay and stay petitions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and dispose of the delay petition filed along with the appeal and the stay petition expeditiously? The petitioner argued that the delay petition and stay petition were filed on April 19, 2023, and April 21, 2023, respectively, and were pending. The petitioner was concerned about the enforcement of the assessment order during the pendency of the stay petition and therefore sought a direction for speedy disposal. The revenue, represented by Sri Christopher Abraham, appeared before the court but no specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the merits of the case or the delay and stay petitions.

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 C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 31ST SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 27922 OF 2023 PETITIONER: VISWAPRAKASH EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST VELLAYAMBALAM, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O, TRIVANDRUM REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE SECRETARY FR. DAISAN YESUDAS, PIN - 695003 BY ADV S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSESSMENT UNIT, ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, E- RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, E- RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003 3 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695003 OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 27922 OF 2023 2 Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2023

JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the second respondent to consider and dispose of the delay petition filed along with Ext.P2 appeal and P3 stay petition, expeditiously.

The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with a delay petition before the second respondent on 19.4.2023. Subsequently, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 stay petition on 21.4.2023. The petitioner is apprehensive that during the pendency of Ext.P3, the respondents may enforce Ext.P1 assessment order. Hence, the writ petition.

Heard; Sri. S.Arun Raj, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher

WP(C) NO. 27922 OF 2023 3 Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that Ext.P3 stay petition is pending consideration before the second respondent since 21.4.2023, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent to consider and dispose of the same, immediately. Resultantly, I order the writ petition as follows:- (i) The second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the delay petition filed along with Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. (ii) Needless to mention, if the second respondent

WP(C) NO. 27922 OF 2023 4 proposes to pass a conditional order of stay, he shall state reasons for the same. (iii) Until such time orders are passed on Ext.P3 stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 shall stand deferred. rmm22/8/2023 C.S.DIAS, JUDGE

WP(C) NO. 27922 OF 2023 5

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27922/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 9-3-2023 UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S 144 B OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2018-19 ALONG WITH THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL E-FILED ON 19-4-2023 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2018-19 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE AY 2018-19 E-FILED ON 21-4-2023 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT:- CIT (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →