VIJI DAIZ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/16795/2023HC KeralaKLHC01036510202326 May 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 2nd/3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre) to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P3) in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The court also mandated that reasons must be provided for the decision on the stay petition. Furthermore, until an order is passed on the stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P7 were to be kept in abeyance. The court did not explicitly mention the disposal of the appeal (Ext.P2) itself, focusing primarily on the stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Viji Daiz, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (3rd respondent) to consider and dispose of her appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P3). The appeal and stay petition were filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (1st respondent). The petitioner contended that despite filing the appeal on December 16, 2019, and the stay petition on May 22, 2023, the authorities had not considered them, and there was a threat of further proceedings based on the assessment order. The respondents were represented by their respective counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent (National Faceless Appeal Centre) should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P3) filed against the assessment order (Ext.P1)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the appeal and stay petition, filed on December 16, 2019, and May 22, 2023, respectively, have not been considered by the appellate authority, leading to a grievance and potential prejudice due to the threat of further proceedings based on the assessment order. Revenue's contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for the respondents appeared, but their specific contentions are not detailed 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 FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 16795 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: VIJI DAIZ AGED 49 YEARS AGED 49, W/O. DAIZ.E.D., EDAKKALATHUR HOUSE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA PARVATHY MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 3 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE DELHI, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)., PIN - 110001 4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DCIT CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001 SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 16795 OF 2023 2

JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition which are filed challenging Ext.P1 assessment order.

2.

The petitioner's case is that the 1st respondent has passed Ext.P1 order, against which the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal on 16.12.2019 and Ext.P3 stay petition on 22.05.2023 before the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent has not considered the same and there is a threat that they would proceed with Ext.P1 assessment order. Hence, the writ petition.

3.

Heard; Sri.Harisankar V. Menon, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.

4.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that Ext.P2 appeal

WP(C) NO. 16795 OF 2023 3 was filed as early as on 16.12.2019 and Ext.P3 stay petition has been filed on 22.05.2023, I am of the view that the 2nd respondent is to be directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition within a time period. Hence, I direct the 2nd/3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that the 2nd/3rd respondent shall mention reasons for passing the stay petition. Until such time orders are passed on Ext.P3 stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P7 shall be kept in abeyance.

C.S.DIAS JUDGE rkc/26.05.23

WP(C) NO. 16795 OF 2023 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16795/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DTD. 04-12-2019 Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 16-12- 2019 Exhibit P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 22-05-2023 Exhibit P4 COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY AXIS BANK, THRISSUR DTD. 16-01-2020 Exhibit P5 COPY OF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF ASSESSMENT FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD,. 20-01-2020 Exhibit P6 COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 12-03-2020 Exhibit P7 COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR REALIZATION OF ARREARS DTD. 10-05-2023 Exhibit P8 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP (C ) NIO,. 11417/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 11-04-2023

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →