CKP GRANITES vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/10403/2019HC KeralaKLHC01025770201903 April 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the outstanding tax amount along with interest on or before May 10, 2019. The remaining 50% of the tax and interest is to be paid on or before June 14, 2019. The Court noted that the revenue did not oppose the grant of installments but objected to the period requested by the assessee. The Court found the eight-month period unrealistic and aimed to balance the assessee's request with the revenue's concerns. The order stipulated that if the petitioner defaults on any installment, the stay granted by the Court would be vacated, allowing the authorities to recover the outstanding tax and interest. Until compliance with the installments, no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, CKP Granites, represented by its partner Mr. C.P. Prathapan, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner sought to pay the balance tax amount in eight monthly installments. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Range 1, Non-Corporate, and the Tax Recovery Officer (Non-Corporate) were the respondents. The learned Standing Counsel for the revenue did not oppose the prayer for installments but raised a serious objection to the requested period of eight months, deeming it unrealistic and arguing against encouraging delayed payments. The Court considered the objections and the need to meet the ends of justice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted permission to pay the outstanding tax amount in eight monthly installments, considering the revenue's objection to the period as unrealistic and potentially encouraging delayed payments. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought to pay the balance tax amount in eight monthly installments. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the revenue did not oppose the grant of installments but seriously objected to the period of eight months, considering it unrealistic and arguing that the Court should not exercise its discretion to encourage delayed payments by the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI WEDNESDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 10403 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: CKP GRANITES 1/96, CHULLUTHARAYIL HOUSE, MAMALA POST, THIRUVANKULAM, ERNAKULAM - 682 305. REPRESENTED BY ITS' PARTNER MR. C.P. PRATHAPAN BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SHRI.ABRAHAM JOB SMTG.MINI(1748) SRI.AJAY V.ANAND SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5), RANGE 1, NON-CORPORATE, C.R. BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018 2 TAX RECOVERY OFFICER (NON-CORPORATE) C.R. BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018 SC SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C)No.10403/19 2 JUDGMENT The prayer of petitioner is to accept the balance tax amount within eight monthly installments. The prayer for granting installments is not opposed by the learned Standing Counsel. But the serious objection raised is that eight monthly installments is completely unrealistic and this Court may not exercise its discretion to encourage delayed payments by the assessee. After taking note of the tenor of the objections, to meet the ends of justice this writ petition is disposed of by this order:- (a) the petitioner deposits 50% of the outstanding tax amount together with interest on or before 10.05.2019 and the balance 50% of the tax together with interest on or before 14.06.2019. The default of any one of the installments the stay granted by this Court is vacated and it is for the Authorities to recover the outstanding tax and interest in accordance with law. In the interregnum subject to complying with installments no coercive steps. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Ac

W.P.(C)No.10403/19 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.03.2015 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 27.03.2015 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// Sd/- PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →