M/S.GIANT PROPERTIES INDIA PVT. LTD., vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction to the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, the stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Furthermore, the Court ordered that any proceedings for the recovery of amounts due in terms of Ext.P1 (the assessment order) shall remain suspended until orders are passed on Ext.P3. The Court acknowledged the limited nature of the plea sought by the petitioner and based its decision on this limited request. No other issues were decided on merits.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, M/s. Giant Properties India Pvt. Ltd., received an order of assessment (Ext.P1) under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner subsequently filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and an application for stay (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The petitioner's sole request in this writ petition was for a direction to the appellate authority to consider and decide the stay petition (Ext.P3) after providing a hearing, and to suspend the recovery of any amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the stay petition was decided. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner? 2. Whether recovery proceedings for amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) should be suspended pending consideration of the stay petition (Ext.P3)? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that a direction was needed for the appellate authority to consider their stay petition after a hearing and to suspend recovery pending that decision. Revenue's Contentions: The learned Standing Counsel for the Department was heard.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 application for stay before the 2nd respondent. The only limited relief sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and to suspend recovery of any amounts due in terms of Ext.P1, pending consideration of Ext.P3 stay petition.
Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Department also.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Department and considering the limited nature of plea sought for by the petitioner, this writ petition stands disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time the orders are -3- passed in Ext.P3, any proceedings for recovery of amount due in terms of Ext.P1 shall remain suspended. GOPINATH P., JUDGE das
-4-
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
