KOLLAM DISTRICT POSTAL TELCOM BSNL EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/12312/2019HC KeralaKLHC01030481201918 June 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala held that the complaint of the petitioner narrowed down to the denial of the opportunity of hearing as directed by the Court in Ext.P14. The Revenue, on instructions, accepted this position. Consequently, the Court set aside the order Ext.P15 passed by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The matter was remitted back to the third respondent (Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax) for consideration and disposal in accordance with law. The High Court noted that the Revenue's stand was placed on record and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, and no issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kollam District Postal Telcom BSNL Employees Co-operative Society Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner's grievance was that the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, in his order dated 12.04.2019 (Ext.P15), failed to consider a previous direction issued by the High Court in Ext.P14. Specifically, the petitioner alleged that the opportunity of hearing, as directed by the Court, was not provided. The Revenue, represented by Mr. Christopher Abraham, requested time to obtain instructions. Subsequently, the Revenue conceded that the petitioner's complaint was limited to the denial of the opportunity of hearing as directed by the Court in Ext.P14.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax provided the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as directed by the High Court in Ext.P14, prior to passing the order Ext.P15? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural compliance). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, in passing order Ext.P15, did not consider the direction issued by the High Court in Ext.P14 and failed to provide the opportunity of hearing. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, after obtaining instructions and perusing Ext.P14, submitted that the petitioner's complaint was indeed limited to the denial of the opportunity of hearing as directed by the High Court. Therefore, the Revenue agreed that Ext.P15 could be set aside and the matter remitted to the third respondent for reconsideration.

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 TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1941 WP(C).No.12312 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: KOLLAM DISTRICT POSTAL TELCOM BSNL EMPLOYEES CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO. Q. 880, KOLLAM. P.O., 691001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KOLLAM RANGE, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOLLAM 691 001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS-1, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEALS, TRIVANDRUM 695 003. 3 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM 695 003. OTHER PRESENT: SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 12312/2019 -2-

J U D G M E N T Heard Mr. C.A. Jojo and Mr. Christopher Abraham for the parties.

Read order dated 12.04.2019: “... The petitioner complains that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax while making the order in Ext.P15 did not consider the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P14. In other words the opportunity of hearing directed by this Court is not provided. Mr.Abraham requests time to get instructions. There shall be interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P15 for ten weeks.” wherein the grievance of the petitioner vis-à-vis Ext.P15 is stated to the extent required for the purpose of granting interim stay of Ext.P15. 3. Mr. Abraham on instructions and after perusing Ext.P14 submits that the complaint of petitioner narrows down to denial of opportunity as directed by this Court in Ext.P14. Therefore, he -3- states that Ext.P15 can be set aside and the matter remitted to third respondent for consideration and disposal in accordance with law. The stand is placed on record.

Ext.P15 is accordingly set aside and matter remitted to third respondent for consideration and disposal in accordance with law. Writ petition disposed of accordingly. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE jjj -4-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2012-13 DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2013-14 DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2014-15 DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2015-16 DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2016-17 DATED 31.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.1.2019 FILED FOR AY 2012-13 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.1.2019 FILED FOR AY 2013-14 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.1.2019 FILED FOR AY 2014-15 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.1.2019 FILED FOR AY 2015-16 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30.1.2019 FILED FOR AY 2016-17 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS DATED 20.2.2019. W.P.(C) No. 12312/2019 -5- EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER S. 226 (3) OF THE IT ACT DATED 1.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE KOLLAM DISTRICT CO- OPERATIVE BANK. EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 7118/2018 DATED 8.3.2019. EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON REVIEW PETITION BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.4.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →