KUNNALIL THOMAS JOY vs. 1. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/39640/2022HC KeralaKLHC01085879202208 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 the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P4 and P4(a)) within three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of the judgment, after providing the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. Crucially, the Court ordered that any demands pursuant to the assessment orders (Exts.P1 and P1(a)) shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on the stay petitions. The principle established is that recovery proceedings can be deferred pending the disposal of stay applications before the appellate authority, provided a reasonable timeframe is set for the authority's decision.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kunnalil Thomas Joy, is challenging assessment orders for assessment years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013, identified as Exts.P1 and P1(a). He filed statutory appeals (Exts. P2 and P2(a)) against these orders and also filed stay petitions (Exts.P4 and P4(a)) before the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur. While the stay petitions were pending, the petitioner received demand notices (Exts.P3 and P3(a)) for recovery of amounts due under the assessment orders. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance until his stay petitions were decided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether further proceedings pursuant to the demand notices (Exts.P3 and P3(a)) should be kept in abeyance until the stay petitions (Exts.P4 and P4(a)) are considered by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner argued that recovery should be stayed pending the decision on his stay petitions. The revenue did not record any specific argument on this point, but was heard by the court.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 39640 OF 2022 PETITIONER: KUNNALIL THOMAS JOY AGED 64 YEARS S/O KUNGALIL VARKEY THOMAS KUNGALIL HOUSE, PUTHURUTHY, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR , PIN - 680623 BY ADVS. K.P.PRADEEP HAREESH M.R. SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN T.T.BIJU T.THASMI M.J.ANOOPA SANU S MALAKEEL RESPONDENTS: 1

THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI- 110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN , PIN - 110001 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), THRISSUR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, S.T.NAGAR, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR , PIN - 680001 3

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THRISSUR THRISSUR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN S.T.NAGAR, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR , PIN - 680001 OTHER PRESENT: ADV. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

..2.. JUDGMENT Dated this the 8th day of December, 2022 The petitioner suffered Exts.P1 and P1 (a) orders of assessment under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011 – 2012 and 2012 – 2013. The petitioner preferred statutory appeals against Exts.P1 and P1 (a) orders of assessment. The appeals filed by the petitioner are on record as Exts. P2 and P2 (a). The petitioner had also filed Exts.P4 and P4(a) stay petitions before the Appellate Authority, the 3rd respondent. Pending consideration of the stay petitions by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner has been served with Exts.P3 and P3(a) demands proposing to recover the amounts due under Exts.P1 and P1(a) orders of assessment.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3 and P3(a) demands may be kept in abeyance, till the stay petitions are considered by the 3rd respondent.

Heard the learned standing counsel for the ..3.. respondent department also.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the limited nature of the relief sought for by the petitioner, this Writ Petition will stand disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 and P4(a) stay petitions filed in Exts.P2 and P2(a) appeals, after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till such time as orders are passed on Exts.P4 and P4(a) stay petitions, any demands pursuant to Exts.P1 and P1(a) orders of assessment shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE RMV ..4..

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39640/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO ANQPJ4458C DATED 13-12-2019 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO ANQPJ4458C DATED 13-12-2019 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 19-01-2020 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 19-01-2020 FILED FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO ANQPJ4458C DATED 13-12-2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO ANQPJ4458C DATED 13-12-2019 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED ON 10-03- 2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT P2 APPEAL BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED ON 10-03- 2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN EXT P2(A) APPEAL BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →