KERALA STATE HANDICAPPED PERSONS WELFARE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/18640/2024HC KeralaKLHC01108158202424 May 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider the petitioner's application for condonation of delay (Ext.P6) expeditiously. If the delay is condoned, the 2nd respondent is further directed to consider the stay petition (Ext.P5) expeditiously. The entire process, including the consideration of the appeal and stay petition, must be completed within a period of two months. Until such time, there will be a stay of recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P3). The court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself, only on the procedural steps for its consideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kerala State Handicapped Persons Welfare Corporation Limited, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P3). They have filed a statutory appeal (Ext.P4) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi (2nd respondent). This appeal was filed with a delay of 65 days, for which an application for condonation of delay (Ext.P6) was submitted. A stay petition (Ext.P5) was also filed. The petitioner's sole request is for their appeal to be considered. The respondents are the Income Tax Department, represented by the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent should consider the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P4) filed with a delay of 65 days, along with the application for condonation of delay (Ext.P6)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks consideration of their statutory appeal (Ext.P4) and has filed an application for condonation of delay (Ext.P6) and a stay petition (Ext.P5). They are praying for the appeal to be considered. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the respondents appeared and was heard. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal at this stage.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C) NO. 18640 OF 2024
TC 17/ 23

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 18640 OF 2024 PETITIONER: KERALA STATE HANDICAPPED PERSONS WELFARE CORPORATION LIMITED TC 17/ 230( 1), JUVENILE HOME COMPOUND, TIRUMALA, POOJAPURA, H.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 012, INDIA, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, BY ADVS. ADITYA UNNIKRISHNAN PRIYADARSINI S. BINISHA BABY RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001. 3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE1(1) AYAKKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 003. BY ADVS. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM P.R.AJITH KUMAR(K/000708/1998), SENIOR STANDING COUNSEL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 18640 OF 2024 : 2 : JUDGMENT

Against Ext.P3 assessment order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal. The appeal has been filed along with Ext.P6 application for condonation of delay of 65 days. The petitioner has also proceed Ext.P5 stay petition. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for consideration of Ext.P4 appeal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for respondents. 3. Ext.P4 is a statutory appeal. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 application for condonation of delay, as expeditiously as possible, and if the delay is condoned, the 2nd respondent shall consider Ext.P5 Stay Petition expeditiously thereafter. The entire exercise shall be completed within

WP(C) NO. 18640 OF 2024 : 3 : a period of two months. Till such time there will be a stay of recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SRJ

WP(C) NO. 18640 OF 2024 : 4 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18640/2024 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.4.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF INTIMATION ORDER DATED 4.5.2020 ISSUED BY THE CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.02.2024 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM 35 DATED 10.05.2024 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ,DATED 6/5/2024. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 65 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL,DATED 6/5/2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →