PALLATHUKADAVIL IBRAHIMKUTTY ABDUL KABEER, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/10163/2024HC KeralaKLHC01091221202414 March 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing that further proceedings on Ext.P2 order, including Ext.P4 notice, shall be kept in abeyance until final orders are passed on Ext.P3 appeal by the ITAT. The reasoning was based on the fact that the appeal (Ext.P3) had already been finally heard by the ITAT and orders were awaited. The Court acknowledged the pendency of the appeal and the petitioner's request to stay further action until the appellate decision. No specific finding was made on the merits of the Section 263 order itself, as the decision was procedural. The operative direction was to hold further proceedings in abeyance.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pallathukadavil Ibrahimkutty Abdul Kabeer, is challenging an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. This order, dated 15.03.2021, was issued in relation to the assessment for the assessment year 2018-19. The PCIT found the original assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, consequently setting it aside and directing a de-novo assessment. The petitioner filed an appeal against the PCIT's order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). While the appeal was heard by the ITAT on 09.02.2024 and orders were awaited, the petitioner received a notice (Ext.P4) pursuant to the PCIT's order. The petitioner sought to keep further proceedings on this notice in abeyance until the ITAT passed its final order on the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether further proceedings on Ext.P4 notice, issued pursuant to the PCIT's order under Section 263, should be kept in abeyance pending the final decision of the ITAT on the petitioner's appeal against the Section 263 order. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that since their appeal against the PCIT's order under Section 263 had already been finally heard by the ITAT and orders were awaited, any further proceedings initiated based on the PCIT's order should be stayed. The petitioner sought to prevent action on Ext.P4 until the appellate authority rendered its decision. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department was heard. The judgment does not explicitly detail the revenue's specific arguments beyond their appearance and participation in the hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 10163 OF 2024 PETITIONER: PALLATHUKADAVIL IBRAHIMKUTTY ABDUL KABEER, AGED 55 YEARS, 71, PALATHUMKADAVIL, KANJOOR PO, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683575. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA ACHYUTH MENON PARVATHY MENON PADMANATHAN K.V. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, NEW DELHI, DELHI, PIN – 110 001. 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN – 682 018. 3 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C-I & C-II BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN – 682 037. 4 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD-2, ALUVA, KAP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, R.S.ROAD, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 101. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 10163 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT The assessment of the petitioner was completed for the year 2018-19 by Ext.P1 order dated 15.03.2021. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax issued Ext.P2 order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act finding that Ext.P1 order of assessment is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue and therefore, set aside the assessment order and directed the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment de-novo. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal against Ext.P2 order. According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 appeal was finally heard on 09.02.2024. It is submitted that pending the passing of final orders on Ext.P3 appeal, the petitioner has been served with Ext.P4 notice pursuant to Ext.P2 order. It is submitted that further proceedings on Ext.P4 may be kept in abeyance till the final orders are issued on Ext.P3 appeal. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department also. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that since Ext.P3 appeal has already been finally heard and orders are

WP(C) NO. 10163 OF 2024 3 awaited, further proceedings on Ext.P2, including Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed on Ext.P3 appeal. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

WP(C) NO. 10163 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10163/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DTD. 15-03-2021 Exhibit P2 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 29-03-2023 Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 24-05- 2023 Exhibit P4 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 01-03-2024

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →