N. Ramachandran vs. 1. 1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/39992/2022HC KeralaKLHC01086627202212 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to expeditiously dispose of the stay application (Exhibit P3) within a period of three months from the date of the order. The Court further ordered that recovery proceedings shall remain stayed until the disposal of the stay petition. The Writ Petition (Civil) was disposed of accordingly. The judgment does not explicitly address the prayer for expeditious disposal of the appeal itself, focusing primarily on the stay application. No issues were left undecided, as the court granted the primary relief sought regarding the stay.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, N. Ramachandran, an Income Tax assessee, received an assessment order and notice (Exhibit P1) from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (1st respondent). He filed a statutory appeal (Exhibit P2) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent) and simultaneously filed an application (Exhibit P3) seeking a stay on the recovery of the disputed amount. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to expeditiously pass orders on the stay application and the appeal, and directing the 1st respondent to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until the appeal is disposed of.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously dispose of the stay application (Exhibit P3) filed by the assessee? (Question of procedure/administrative action) 2. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously dispose of the statutory appeal (Exhibit P2) filed by the assessee? (Question of procedure/administrative action) 3. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until the disposal of the appeal? (Question of procedure/administrative action) Assessee's contentions: The assessee prayed for directions to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay petition and the appeal expeditiously, and for a stay on recovery proceedings pending disposal of the appeal. Revenue's contentions: The judgment records that both sides were heard, but does not detail the revenue's specific arguments.

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 K. BABU MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 39992 OF 2022 PETITIONER: N. RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 65 YEARS, MEKKATHIL VEEDU, THATHAMALA, PERUMKADAVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN – 695124 BY ADVS. P.S.SOMAN T.RADHAMONY B.PRABHAKARAN NANCY PRABHAKAR RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695003 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, COCHIN, PIN - 682018 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.39992 of 2022 2 K.BABU, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.39992 of 2022 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of December , 2022

JUDGMENT

The prayers in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:- “(i) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order directing the 2nd Respondent to pass orders in Exhibit-P3 application for stay expeditiously within a time limit fixed by this Hon’able Court. (ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order directing the 2nd Respondent to pass orders in Exhibit P2 appeal petition expeditiously within a time limit fixed by this Hon’able Court. (iii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order directing the 1st Respondent to keep in abeyance all recovery proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P1 penalty order till the disposal of Exhibit P2 appeal. (iv) to dispense the filing of translation of the vernacular document. And (iv) Pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems justified in the facts and circumstances of the case..”

2.

Heard both sides.

3.

The petitioner is an Income Tax assessee on the rolls of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner has been served with Ext.P1 assessment order and notice. The petitioner filed Ext.P2 statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent and filed Ext.P3 application seeking stay of recovery of the disputed amount.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P3 stay petition as expeditiously as possible.

5.

The 2nd respondent is therefore, directed to expeditiously dispose of Ext.P3 application at any rate within a period of three months from this date. The recovery proceedings shall stand stayed till the disposal of Ext.P3 stay petition. The Writ Petition (Civil) is disposed of accordingly.

K.BABU JUDGE VPK

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39992/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITNS 65 DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020- 21. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 DATED 22-10-2021 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2020-21 DATED 25-11-2022 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1047595775(1) DATED 23-11-2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →