MANDACHERI PUTHIYAVEETTIL MANOHARAN, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KANNUR,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/21486/2023HC KeralaKLHC01046969202306 July 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while considering the pleadings and materials on record, noted that the stay petitions (Exts.P6 and P7) were pending before the third respondent. Consequently, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by issuing specific directions. The third respondent was directed to consider and dispose of the stay petitions expeditiously, within three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of the judgment, after providing the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. If a conditional stay order was proposed, the third respondent was to state the reasons for it. Crucially, all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1), penalty order (Ext.P3), and the notice threatening enforcement (Ext.P5) were to stand deferred until orders were passed on the stay petitions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mandacheri Puthiyaveettil Manoharan, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the third respondent, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, to consider and dispose of pending appeals (Exts.P2 and P4) and stay petitions (Exts.P6 and P7). The petitioner was aggrieved by an assessment order (Ext.P1) and a penalty order (Ext.P3). In the interim, the fourth respondent, the Tax Recovery Officer, issued a notice (Ext.P5) threatening to enforce the assessment and penalty orders. The petitioner requested that further proceedings be deferred until the stay petitions were decided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the third respondent should be directed to consider and dispose of the pending stay petitions (Exts.P6 and P7) expeditiously? (Question of procedure/direction) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the third respondent should be directed to consider and dispose of the stay petitions and appeals, and until then, further proceedings pursuant to the assessment and penalty orders should be deferred. The petitioner relied on the pendency of the stay petitions before the third respondent. Revenue's Contention: The learned Counsel for the respondents, Sri. Christopher Abraham, appeared and was heard. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue in the judgment.

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 6TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 21486 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1 MANDACHERI PUTHIYAVEETTIL MANOHARAN, AGED 60 YEARS VINAYASREE, KEEZHUR P.O, IRITTY, THALASSERY, KANNUR, PIN - 670703 BY ADV S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KANNUR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KONNOTHUMCHAL, CHOVVA.P.O, KANNUR, PIN - 670006 2 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KANNUR RANGE, OFFICE OF JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KONNOTHUMCHAL, CHOVVA P.O, KANNUR, PIN - 670006 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, DELHI, PIN - 110001 4 TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001 BY ADV SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.21486 of 2023 2 C.S.DIAS, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.21486 of 2023 ------------------------- Dated this the 06th day of July, 2023

JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the third respondent to consider and dispose of Exts.P2 and P4 appeals along with Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions, and until such time to defer further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 notice.

2.

The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P3 penalty order, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P2 and P4 appeals, respectively. Along with the appeals, the petitioner has also preferred Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions. In the meantime, the fourth respondent has issued Ext.P5 notice threatening to enforce Exts.P1 and P3. The petitioner prays that the third respondent may be directed to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions, expeditiously.

3.

Heard; Sri.S.Arun Raj, 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.P6 and P7 stay petitions are pending consideration before the third respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition. Resultantly, the writ petition is ordered as follows: (i) The third respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions, 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 this judgment, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. (ii) If the third respondent proposes to pass any conditional order of stay, he shall state reason for the same. (iv) Until such time orders are passed on Exts.P6 and P7, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1, P3 and P5 shall stand deferred. C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/06-07

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21486/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20-12- 2019 PASSED U/S 143 (3) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18 ALONG WITH THE DEMAND NOTICE EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL DATED 7-1-2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P-1 ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE AY 2017-18 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-2-2020 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271D OF THE ACT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL DATED 10-3-2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2017-18 CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P-3 PENALTY ORDER EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18-5-2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2017-18 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION E-FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT P-2 APPEAL FOR THE AY 2017-18 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION E-FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT P-4 PENALTY APPEAL FOR THE AY 2017-18 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →