K. AKBAR ALI. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/40891/2022HC KeralaKLHC01088688202216 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing that any steps to recover amounts due under the assessment order shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on the petitioner's stay petition by the 2nd respondent (NFAC). The Court further directed the 2nd respondent to endeavor to pass orders on the stay petition within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The principle is that recovery can be deferred pending the disposal of a stay application before the appellate authority, provided the appellate authority is directed to decide the stay application expeditiously.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K. Akbar Ali, is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2014-15. He filed an appeal and a stay petition before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. While the stay petition was pending, the petitioner received a demand notice for the amounts due under the assessment order. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking a stay on the recovery of these amounts until the NFAC decided on his stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order should be stayed pending the decision on the stay petition by the appellate authority? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery steps should be halted until the NFAC adjudicates on his stay petition, implying that proceeding with recovery while a stay is pending would prejudice his appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Standing Counsel, did not explicitly record arguments against the limited relief sought by the petitioner in the judgment. The Standing Counsel was heard, but their specific arguments are not detailed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None explicitly mentioned 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 GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 40891 OF 2022 PETITIONER: 1 K. AKBAR ALI. AGED 59 YEARS ZAINA MANZIL VEEKSHANAM ROAD. KOCHI, PIN - 682018 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE,-1 ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682018 2 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE DELHI, PIN – 110001 REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.40891 of 2022 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 16th day of December, 2022 The petitioner has suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for the assessment year 2014-15 under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has been issued with Ext.P4 notice demanding the payment of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment. The petitioner prays that pending consideration of Ext.P3 stay petition by the 2nd respondent, demands under Ext.P1 order of assessment maybe stayed. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel also. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the limited nature of relief sought for by the petitioner, the writ petition will stand disposed of directing that any steps to recover WPC No.40891 of 2022 3 amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed on Ext.P3 stay petition by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent shall endeavour to pass orders on Ext.P3 within a period of two months from the date of receipt

of a certified copy of this judgment. GOPINATH P. JUDGE SKP/16-12

WPC No.40891 of 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40891/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 27-09-2021 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 27-10-2021 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 12-12-2022 EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF ARREAR NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 05-12-2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NILP.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →