ELTON TECHNOLOGIES vs. PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/25281/2014HC KeralaKLHC01070901201429 September 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON5 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is a writ petition filed before the High Court of Kerala and does not contain any findings, reasoning, or ratio decidendi from a Tribunal. Therefore, it is not possible to state what the Tribunal decided, the reasoning that led to it, or the operative directions. No issue was expressly left undecided as no decision has been rendered in the excerpt.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Elton Technologies Pvt Ltd. (formerly Elton Web Solutions Pvt Ltd.) and its Managing Director, Mr. B.R. Ajit, have filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an order passed by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi. The specific order or action under challenge is not detailed in the provided text, nor are the assessment year(s) or the amount in dispute. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not elaborated upon in the given excerpt. The respondents are various income tax authorities, including the Principal Chief Commissioner, Commissioners, Deputy Commissioner, and Assistant Commissioners of Income Tax, all based in Kochi.

What were the issues?

The provided text is a writ petition filed before the High Court of Kerala and does not contain the issues that the Tribunal had to decide, nor the arguments presented by the assessee or the revenue. Therefore, no questions of law or mixed law and fact can be identified, and no contentions or reliance on authorities, circulars, or precedents can be stated. The judgment excerpt is silent on these aspects.

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 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/7TH ASWINA, 1936 WP(C).No. 25281 of 2014 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ELTON TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ELTON WEB SOLUTIONS PVT LTD), 3RD FLOOR PUTHURAN PLAZA, KPCC JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 011, KERALA REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.B.R.AJIT. 2. MR.B.R.AJIT, MANAGING DIRECTOR, ELTON TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD., PUTHURAN PLAZA, THIRD FLOOR, MG ROAD, KPCC JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 011. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI - 682 018. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI, KERALA - 682 018. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, KOCHI, KERALA - 682 018. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (1), KOCHI - 682 018. 5. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI - 682 018. 6. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1), KOCHI - 682 018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RVS. WP(C).No. 25281 of 2014 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : EXT. P1 - TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER SEC. 148 DT. 08.3.13. EXT. P2 - TRUE COPY OF 5TH RESPONDENT'S LETTER DT. 04.10.13. EXT. P3 - TRUE COPY OF SHOWCAUSE NOTICE UNDER SEC. 144 OF IT ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 DT. 31.10.13. EXT. P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT UNDER SEC. 133(A) DT. 21.12.12. EXT. P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF RETURNS FOR THE YEAR 2007-08. EXT. P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATION LETTER DT. 23.12.13. EXT. P7 - TRUE COPY OF 4TH RESPONDENT'S LETTER DT. 11.3.14 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. EXT. P8 - TRUE COPY OF 4TH RESPONDENT'S LETTER DT. 18.3.14. EXT. P9 - TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER'S LETTER DT. 26.3.14 SENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT. P10 - TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH TAX CALCULATION STATEMENT. EXT. P10(A) - TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SEC. 156 OF IT ACT. EXT. P10 (B) - TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER SEC 274 READ WITH SEC 271(1) (C) OF IT ACT. EXT. P10(C) - TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER SEC. 271-F OF IT ACT. EXT. P11 - TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE UNDER SEC. 279(1) DT. 25.3.14. EXT. P12 - TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER'S LETTER DT. 27/3/14. EXT. P13 - TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER'S LETTER DT. 22.4.14. EXT. P14 - TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DT. 11.8.14 FILED BY PETITIONER FOR COMPOUNDING OF ALLEGED OFFENCES. EXT. P15 - TRUE COPY OF RTI REPLY DT. 26.5.14. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE RVS. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 25281 of 2014 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2014

J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is a private limited company, having its main object to carry on the business as Software Developers, E- Commerce, Internet Service Providers and all information technology related business, while the 2nd petitioner is its Managing Director. In the course of business, they effected various conveyances, which included purchase of plots and development of the same as 'Silver Sand Island', near Vytilla in Ernakulam. Allegedly since the said purchase of land was ultravires the Memorandum of Association of the 1st petitioner company, the petitioners were forced to sell the land.

Pursuant to the survey conducted by the 6th respondent, various particulars were collected and proceedings were taken against the petitioners under different provisions of the Income Tax Act. Notice was also issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 08.03.2013 in respect of the assessment year 2007-08, referring to the 'capital gain' accumulated.

In the course of further proceedings, assessment was finalised against the petitioners as per Ext.P10 series, followed by demand notices under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved of the assessment, the petitioners moved the third respondent/the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, before whom the appeals are pending. It is in the meanwhile, that the petitioners have been served with Ext.P11 notice under Section 279(1) of the Act, as to why prosecution proceedings shall not be initiated under Section 276 CC of the Income Tax Act. It is stated that the petitioners have submitted a detailed reply. But without any regard to the same, proceedings were pursued by the respondent department and it was only on coming across the summons served upon the petitioners, that they could realise that prosecution proceedings had already been initiated, which according to the petitioners is without considering their objections and hence not correct or sustainable.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that, by virtue of the turn of events and other embarrassing circumstances, the petitioners have decided to seek for permission of the respondents for compounding the offence, as provided under Section 279 (2) of the Act. It was accordingly, that Ext.P14 representation was preferred before the first respondent/Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The prayer is to cause the same to be considered within the shortest possible time.

Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents as well.

In view of the limited nature of the reliefs sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to deal with the merits of the case. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to consider Ext.P14 representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Further steps by the respondents in connection with prosecution proceedings, if any, may be kept in abeyance till such time. The writ petition is disposed of. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. Pn

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →