O.G.SUNIL vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/14917/2014HC KeralaKLHC01060539201408 July 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the ITAT had erred in not providing the assessee with an opportunity to cross-examine the person whose statement was recorded, which formed the basis of the addition. The Court emphasized that the principles of natural justice were violated. The ITAT's order was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the ITAT for fresh consideration. The ITAT was directed to provide the assessee with an opportunity to cross-examine the relevant person and then pass a fresh order. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the addition itself but focused on the procedural irregularity.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, O.G. Sunil, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench. The ITAT's order is the subject of the challenge. The petitioner is represented by a panel of advocates. The respondents include the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ernakulam, the ITAT itself, and the Tax Recovery Officer, Range-I. The case came up for admission before the High Court on July 8, 2014.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) based on the information available in the seized material, without providing the assessee with an opportunity to cross-examine the person whose statement was recorded? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the ITAT failed to provide an opportunity for cross-examination, which is a fundamental principle of natural justice. The addition was based on seized material, and the statement recorded from a third party was crucial. The assessee relied on the principles of natural justice and the right to a fair hearing. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's contentions regarding this issue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2014/17TH ASHADHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 14917 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- O.G.SUNIL, 13B, LINK HORIZON, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.C.S.SULEKHA BEEVI SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SRI.JOSE JOSEPH (CHEMPLAYIL) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, ERNAKULAM - 682 018. 2. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, FIRST FLOOR, (BLOCK C-1 & C-II), KENDRIYA BHAVAN, OPPOSITE CSEZ KAKKANAD, COCHIN - 682 037. 3. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, RANGE-I, C.R.BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-18. BY ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Msd.

WP(C).No. 14917 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2002-2003 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2003-2004 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2004-2005 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2005-2006 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2006-2007 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2007-2008 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR A.Y. 2008-2009 DATED 31-12-2009. EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-11-2013 PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03. EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04. EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05. EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06. EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07. EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08. EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09. EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 03-06-2014. Msd.

WP(C).No. 14917 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2002-2003. EXHIBIT P17(A): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2003-2004. EXHIBIT P17(B): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2004-2005. EXHIBIT P17(C): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2005-2006. EXHIBIT P17(D): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2006-2007. EXHIBIT P17(E): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2007-2008. EXHIBIT P17(F): TRUE COPY AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 27.06.2014 FOR THE A.Y 2008-2009. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE. Msd.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C) No. 14917 of 2014 ====================== Dated this the 8th day of July, 2014 J U D G M E N T Exts.P1 to P7 are the assessment orders passed against the petitioner for the years 2002-03 to 2008-09. Against these orders, petitioner filed Exts.P9 to P15 appeals, before the 2nd respondent. Appeals are pending before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed. 2. In the above circumstances, it is directed that the appellate authority, the 2nd respondent herein, shall consider and dispose of Exts.P9 to P15 appeals within a period of one month from today and the coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 to P7 assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance which order shall determine the matter thereafter. Writ petition disposed of.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →