A.M. ABDUL RAZAK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/36167/2018HC KeralaKLHC01083481201818 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the petitioner's plea and permitted him to discharge his entire liability in 10 installments. The first installment was to commence on March 28, 2013, followed by subsequent monthly payments. The court stipulated that if the petitioner defaulted on any installment, the respondent (Tax Recovery Officer) would be free to proceed against him. Coercive steps against the petitioner were deferred in accordance with these directions. The principle established is that courts may grant installment facilities for tax recovery in appropriate cases, subject to strict adherence to the payment schedule.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, A.M. Abdul Razak, a hill produce dealer, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition was directed against the Income Tax Officer and the Tax Recovery Officer. The petitioner sought to discharge his entire liability as per a demand notice (Ext.P4) issued by the Tax Recovery Officer in installments. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner approached the court for relief regarding the payment of a tax demand.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to discharge his entire tax liability in installments? (Question of fact and law) The petitioner contended that he should be allowed to pay his tax demand in installments. The revenue did not record any specific arguments against this plea in the judgment. The core issue was whether the court should grant the petitioner's request for an installment-based payment of the tax demand.

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 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE MONDAY ,THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 36167 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: A.M. ABDUL RAZAK HILL PRODUCE DEALER, VANDIPERIYAR, PEERMADE, IDUKKI-685 533. BY ADVS. SRI.S.EASWARAN AUGUSTINE.M.A. SMT.SOUMYA JAMES SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) SRI.P.SREEKUMAR (THOTTAKKATTUKARA) RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-I, OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SHASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001 2 TAX RECOVERY OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SHASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001 BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SENIOR COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 36167 of 2018 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner confines his reliefs to discharge his entire liability as per Ext.P4 demand notice issued by the 2nd respondent Tax Recovery Officer, Income Tax Office, Kottayam in installments.

Having considered the plea, the petitioner is permitted to discharge his entire liability in demand in 10 installments starting from 28.03.2013, followed by every month. If the petitioner commits default in remitting any one of the installments as above, the respondent is free to proceed against the petitioner. Coercive steps as against the petitioner shall be deferred in tune with the above directions. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE SB/19/03/2019 JUDGE

WP(C).No. 36167 of 2018 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 25.03.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 18TH JANUVARY, 2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 22.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 15.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF TAX PAYER COUNTER FOIL DATED 30.10.2018 RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →