STEPHEN PATHICKAL KURIAN,KOTTAYAM. vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOTTAYAM.

WP(C)/1677/2023HC KeralaKLHC01004072202317 February 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Stephen Pathickal Kurian, is challenging coercive steps initiated against him. The assessment for the assessment year 2013-14 was completed in 2015 and subsequently rectified in 2021. The petitioner had preferred an appeal against this rectification, which was pending before the appellate authority. The petitioner contends that the rectification itself was unwarranted and beyond the time limit. Due to the initiation of coercive steps while the appeal was pending, the petitioner approached the High Court.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not delve into the merits of the rectification or the validity of the coercive steps. It noted that the petitioner had already preferred a statutory appeal against the rectification. Therefore, the Court found it unnecessary to examine the merits of the case at this stage in the writ petition. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P3) at the earliest, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The coercive steps initiated against the petitioner were ordered to be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the appeal. The ratio decidendi is that when a statutory appeal is pending, the High Court may direct expeditious disposal of the appeal and stay coercive steps, rather than adjudicating the merits in a writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rectification of the assessment order for the assessment year 2013-14, completed in 2021, was warranted and within the time limit, as per the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the rectification was unwarranted and beyond time. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether coercive steps initiated against the petitioner are valid while an appeal against the rectification order is pending. The petitioner argued that coercive steps should not be taken during the pendency of the appeal. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 28TH MAGHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 1677 OF 2023 PETITIONER: STEPHEN PATHICKAL KURIAN, AGED 58 YEARS PATHICKAL,VELIYANNOR, MEENACHIL,KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686638 BY ADV V.DEVANANDA NARASIMHAM RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KOTTAYAM RANGE KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC),2 45-A,NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 T.R.RAVI, J. ---------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 1677 OF 2023 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of February, 2023 JUDGMENT The assessment for the year 2013-14 was completed in 2015 and rectified in 2021. The petitioner has preferred an appeal which is still pending. In the meanwhile, coercive ste

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →