YOOSUF ABOOBAKERKUNJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/7933/2019HC KeralaKLHC01020130201915 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Appellate Authority to consider the delay petition and the stay petition within a period of two months. It was further directed that if the petitioner had deposited 20% of the demand, the recovery of the remaining demand shall be stayed until the disposal of the delay and stay petitions. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself but focused on the procedural aspects of the delay and stay applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Venad Steel Agencies, filed an appeal against an assessment order under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a delay of 833 days. Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed a stay petition. The petitioner stated that they had paid 20% of the demand raised by the Income Tax Officer. The matter was brought before the High Court of Kerala.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Authority should consider the delay petition filed by the petitioner along with the appeal and the stay petition. 2. Whether the recovery of the remaining demand should be stayed until the disposal of the delay and stay petitions. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought consideration of their delay and stay petitions and a stay on the recovery of the demand, having already paid 20% of it. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Income Tax Act, 1961

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 FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 7933 of 2019 PETITIONER: YOOSUF ABOOBAKERKUNJU VENAD STEEL AGENCIES, CHANDANATHOPE, KUNDARA, KOLLAM 691 501. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ SMT.C.T.SUJA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NR.KARBALA JN, RAILWAY STATION ROAD,KOLLAM-691 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. SMT THUSHARA JAMES-GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 7933 of 2019 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner filed an appeal, aggrieved by an assessment order under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Appeal is filed along with 833 days delay. The petitioner also filed a stay petition. The petitioner submits that he has paid 20% of demand. That be so, there shall be a direction to the Appellate Authority to consider the delay petition as well as stay petition within a period of two months. If the petitioner had deposited 20% of the demand, it shall be further stayed for recovery till the disposal of delay petition and stay petition.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. SAS/15/03/2019 //// A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE P.A. TO JUDGE JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2008-09 EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2009-10 EXHIBIT P1 BOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2010-11 EXHIBIT P1 COF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT P1 DOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P1 EOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271(1) (C) OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14 EXHIBIT P2OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2008- 09 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2009- 10 EXHIBIT P2 BOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2010- EXHIBIT P2 COF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2011- 12 EXHIBIT P2 DOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2012- 13 EXHIBIT P2 EOF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 29.9.2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013- 14 EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P-1 PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2008-09 EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 1(A) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-10 EXHIBIT P3 BOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 1(B) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2010-11 EXHIBIT P3 COF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 1(C) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT P3 DOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 1(D) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P3 EOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 1(E) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2013-14 EXHIBIT P4OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P-2 PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2008-09 EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 2(A) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2009-2010 EXHIBIT P4 BOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 2(B) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2010-2011 EXHIBIT P4 COF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 2(C) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2011-2012 EXHIBIT P4 DOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 2(D) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2012-2013 EXHIBIT P4 EOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM CONTAINING THE FACTS, GROUNDS AND DELAY CONDONATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER CHALLENGING EXHIBIT P- 2(E) PENALTY ORDER FOR THE AY 2013-2014 EXHIBIT P5OF STAY PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AYS 2008-09 TO 2013-14 EXHIBIT P6OF THE PROCLAMATION OF SALE DATED 11.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AYS 2008-09 TO 2013-14

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →