HIDAYATH CHARITABLE SOCIETY ORUMANAYOOR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/25455/2023HC KeralaKLHC01055812202303 August 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and dispose of the pending stay petitions (Exts.P3 and P6) in accordance with the 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 must be afforded an opportunity of being heard. If the Commissioner proposes to pass a conditional order of stay, reasons for the same must be stated. Until orders are passed on the stay petitions, all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1), intimation (Ext.P4), and demand notice (Ext.P7) shall be deferred. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeals or the stay petitions themselves, but rather directed their timely adjudication.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Hidayath Charitable Society, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre) to consider and dispose of stay petitions (Exts.P3 and P6) expeditiously. The petitioner had filed appeals (Exts.P2 and P5) against an assessment order (Ext.P1) and an intimation (Ext.P4). Due to issues with filing stay petitions online, they were filed before the fourth respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur), which were then transmitted to the second respondent. During the pendency of these appeals and stay petitions, the third respondent (Income Tax Officer Exemption Ward) issued a demand notice (Ext.P7). The petitioner apprehended enforcement of the assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and dispose of pending stay petitions filed by the assessee, given the delay in their disposal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their stay petitions (Exts.P3 and P6) have been pending since December 31, 2021, and July 5, 2023, respectively. They are apprehensive that the revenue authorities might proceed to enforce the assessment order (Ext.P1) and demand notice (Ext.P7) while the stay petitions are undecided. Therefore, a direction for expeditious disposal is necessary to protect their interests. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that Sri. Christopher Abraham appeared for the respondents. However, no specific arguments or contentions were recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

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 THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 25455 OF 2023 PETITIONER: HIDAYATH CHARITABLE SOCIETY ORUMANAYOOR ORUMANAYOOR P.O CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, PIN - 680512 BY ADVS. C.A.JOJO JIMMI JOSE RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680001 4 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 25455 OF 2023 2 Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2023

JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the second respondent to consider and dispose of Exts.P3 and P6 stay petitions, expeditiously.

2.

The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P4 intimation, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P2 and P5 appeals, respectively, before the second respondent. As the link to file the stay petitions was not opened, the petitioner filed Exts.P3 and P6 stay petitions before the fourth respondent, which has been transmitted to the second respondent. During the pendency of Exts.P2, P3, P5 and P6, the third respondent has issued Ext.P7 demand notice. The petitioner is apprehensive that the respondents may enforce Ext.P1 assessment order. Hence, the writ petition.

WP(C) NO. 25455 OF 2023 3

3.

Heard; Sri.C.A Jojo, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that Exts.P3 and P6 stay petitions are pending consideration before the second respondent since 31.12.2021 and 5.7.2023, 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 Exts.P3 and P6, 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.

WP(C) NO. 25455 OF 2023 4 (ii) If the second respondent proposes to pass a conditional order of stay, he shall state reasons for the same. (iii) Until such time orders are passed on Exts.P3 and P6, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 , P4 and P7 shall stand deferred. rmm3/8/2023 C.S.DIAS, JUDGE

WP(C) NO. 25455 OF 2023 5

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25455/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.07.2021 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 31.12.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 31.12.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE INTIMATION U/S 143(1) DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL PROCESSING ZONE Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 08.07.2023 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 05.07.2023 FILED BEFORE THE THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND LETTER DATED 06.06.2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →