M/S.SAFE DEVELOPMENT ALMS TRUST vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/21681/2019HC KeralaKLHC01055438201908 August 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Safe Development Alms Trust, filed an appeal (Ext.P2) against an assessment order (Ext.P1) passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act. Along with the appeal, the petitioner filed a stay petition (Ext.P3). The petitioner contended that the mere filing or pendency of an appeal does not automatically grant a stay, and delays in disposing of the stay petition could lead to recovery actions by the assessing officer, rendering the appeal ineffective. The petitioner sought a direction for the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the stay petition expeditiously, as provided by law to protect the appellant's interest pending appeal.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, perusing the assessment order, appeal, and stay petition, was satisfied that a case was made out for issuing necessary directions. The Court directed the appellate authority (second respondent) to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P3) as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Additionally, the respondents were directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from the date of the judgment. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay petition itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of expeditious disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to expeditiously consider and dispose of the stay petition filed by the assessee. The assessee argued that delay in disposing of the stay petition could render the appeal ineffective due to potential recovery actions by the assessing officer, and that the law provides for expeditious disposal of stay petitions to protect the appellant's interest. The revenue did not record any arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153A

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 S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1941 WP(C).No.21681 OF 2019(I) PETITIONER: M/S.SAFE DEVELOPMENT ALMS TRUST 1, MELAMURI, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING TRUSTEE, P.V.MOHAMMED HARIF, AGED 51, S/O. P.V.HASSAN. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR-680 001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM-682 036. BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.21681 OF 2019(I) 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the order of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has filed the appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 expeditiously.

2.

The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to gr

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.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,560 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →