VELLARA ANTONY SUNNY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/35649/2023HC KeralaKLHC01080532202307 December 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court observed that the petitioner had already filed an appeal against the assessment order with a significant delay. Consequently, the Court directed that the Appellate Authority should consider the appeal in accordance with the law and expeditiously. The Court did not explicitly rule on the technical defect or the method of computing delay, but rather disposed of the writ petition by directing the appellate authority to proceed with the already filed appeal. The primary focus shifted to the appellate process itself, acknowledging the existence of a delayed appeal that needed adjudication.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vellara Antony Sunny, filed a Writ Petition (Civil) before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the respondents, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, to cure a technical defect in the online filing system. This defect prevented the petitioner from filing a statutory appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 27/12/2019. The petitioner sought to file the appeal online, with any delay to be computed only after the technical defect was rectified. The High Court noted that the petitioner had already filed an appeal against the assessment order with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents should be directed to cure the technical defect in the online filing system to enable the petitioner to file a statutory appeal against the assessment order dated 27/12/2019. 2. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be computed only after rectifying the technical defect. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that a technical defect in the online portal prevented them from filing a statutory appeal against the assessment order. They sought a direction to rectify this defect and allow them to file the appeal, with any delay to be calculated only after the technical issue was resolved. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. However, the court's observation implies that the appeal itself has been filed with a delay, irrespective of the technical issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 35649 OF 2023 PETITIONER: VELLARA ANTONY SUNNY AGED 68 YEARS S/O ANTONY VELLARA NAYARANGADI VYLATHURUNHAMANGHAT, VADEKKEKAD CHAVALCKAD, KERALA, THRISSUR, PIN - 679563 BY ADVS. K.LATHA JOMTON F. PAYANKAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DCIT CIRCLE 1 (1) TPS THRISSUR., PIN - 680001 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1) THRISSUR., PIN - 680001 BY ADVS. ADV. P.G. JAYASHANKAR KEERTHIVAS GIRI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 7th day of December, 2023 The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following prayers: i. To issue Writ of Mandamus or Direction or any other appropriate order or Direction to the respondents to cure the technical defect online first and then allow the petitioner to file online statutory appeal against the Exhibit P4 assessment order U/S 143 (3) dated 27/12/2019 by computing any delay only after curing such technical defects by then. ii. To grant such other and further relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to allow this Writ Petition.

2.

The petitioner has already filed an appeal against the assessment order with huge delay. Let the Appellate Authority consider the appeal in accordance with the law, expeditiously. Considering the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. DINESH KUMAR SINGH AP JUDGE

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35649/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 21-09-2023 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE E PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREEN SHOT OF VIEW NOTICES FOR E PROCEEDINGS OF THE PETITIONER UPLOADING THE ORDER UNDER 143 (3) IN THE NOTICE PORTAL SECTION DATED NIL Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143 (3) OF INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 27/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4A THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND U/S 156 OF INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 27/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4B THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET AGAINST EXHIBIT P3 ORDER U/S 143 (3) OF INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018 DATED 27/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 270A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 DATED 11-01-2022 Exhibit P5A THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET AGAINST EXHIBIT P5 PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 270A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 DATED 11-01-2022

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →