MUHAMMED ALI P.P vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/18851/2024HC KeralaKLHC01108654202428 May 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the third respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider the stay petitions (Exts. P8 to P10) expeditiously, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders (Exts. P2 to P4) shall be deferred until orders are passed on the stay petitions. The Court disposed of the writ petition with these directions. The principle established is that recovery actions should generally be stayed pending the disposal of stay petitions filed along with statutory appeals, to ensure that the appellate process is not rendered infructuous. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Muhammed Ali P.P., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging recovery proceedings initiated by the revenue. The petitioner had filed appeals against assessment orders for assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the third respondent. Along with the appeals, stay petitions were also filed. The petitioner's grievance was that recovery actions were being taken despite the pendency of these appeals and stay petitions. The assessment orders were passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kozhikode, and the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kochi.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery proceedings initiated by the revenue are valid during the pendency of statutory appeals and stay petitions before the appellate authority, concerning the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21? The petitioner argued that recovery steps were being taken during the pendency of appeals (Exts. P5 to P7) and stay petitions (Exts. P8 to P10) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner sought a deferral of recovery proceedings until the stay petitions were decided. The revenue, represented by its standing counsel, did not present any specific arguments against the petitioner's plea for deferral of recovery pending the decision on stay petitions. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 7TH JYAISHTA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 18851 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: MUHAMMED ALI P.P AGED 62 YEARS A-11A BENZEER MANZIL , KUTTOOR POST AR NAGAR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676305 BY ADVS. P.RAGHUNATHAN PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RISHAL.K SAIJESH A. RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001 2 ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, KOCHI, PIN - 682018 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS] C.R BUILDING, I.S PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682018 BY SRI. NAVANEETH K. NATH- SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2 WPC 18551 OF 2024 JUDGMENT Against Exts. P2 to P4 assessment orders for the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, the petitioner had preferred Exts. P5 to P7 appeals and Exts.P8 to P10 stay petitions before the 3rd respondent appellate authority. The grievance of the petitioner is that, during the pendency of the appeals, steps are being taken for recovery of the amounts due as per the assessment orders. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents. Since Exts.P5 to P7 are statutory appeals, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Exts.P8 to P10 stay petitions, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till

3 WPC 18551 OF 2024 such time orders are passed on Exts.P8 to P10, all recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2 to P4 assessment orders shall be deferred. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-+

4 WPC 18551 OF 2024 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18851/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit- P1 TRUE COPY OF ARREAR NOTICE DTD 15.05.2024 Exhibit- P2 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153C FOR AY 2018.19 DTD 02.03.2024 Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153C FOR AY 2019.20 DTD 02.03.2024 Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 153C FOR AY 2020.21 DTD 02.03.2024 Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF APPEALS- FORM 35 AGAINST EXT. P2 TO THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) Exhibit- P6 TRUE COPY OF APPEALS- FORM 35 AGAINST EXT. P3 TO THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) Exhibit- P7 TRUE COPY OF APPEALS- FORM 35 AGAINST EXT. P4 TO THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) Exhibit-P8 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION OF STAY TO EXT. P2 DTD 08.04.2024 Exhibit -P9 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION OF STAY TO EXT. P3 DTD 08.04.2024 Exhibit- P10 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION OF STAY TO EXT. P4 DTD 08.04.2024 Exhibit11 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 16876/2024 DTD 03.05.2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →