YOGAKSHEMA TRUST vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX /INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/10814/2024HC KeralaKLHC01092344202415 March 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, having considered the submissions of both parties, decided that the writ petition could be disposed of with a specific direction. The Court directed the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Joint Commissioner (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P3) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner concerning the assessment order (Ext.P1) and related orders shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the appeal. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order itself.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Yogakshema Trust, is aggrieved by an assessment order dated March 15, 2024, for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner has filed an appeal against this order before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Joint Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi. A stay petition has also been filed. The petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings before their stay petition is considered, leading them to file this writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The High Court considered submissions from both the petitioner and the respondent-Department.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when an appeal and a stay petition are pending before the appellate authority, and the petitioner apprehends coercive action. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that they are apprehending coercive proceedings in relation to the assessment order even before their stay petition is considered by the appellate authority, necessitating the intervention of the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The respondent-Department's submissions were considered by the Court. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 10814 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: YOGAKSHEMA TRUST REPRESENTED BY, ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE KESHAVA SMRITHI CHITHRA LANE, ALUVA, KERALA, PIN - 683101 BY ADV SUVIN.R.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX /INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)/ THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE ROOM NO 245 A NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 SRI. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 10814 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2018-19 under the Income Tax Act, 1961, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P3. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P4. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence, this writ petition.

Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent-Department, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed with a direction.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner in respect of Exts. P1 and P2 shall be kept in abeyance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P., JUDGE ajt

WP(C) NO. 10814 OF 2024 3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10814/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 06/04/2021 UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTIONS 143(3A) & 143(3B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT FOR THE AY 2018-19 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 06/04/2021 UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST APPEAL E-FILED ON 13/08/2021 FOR THE AY 2018-19 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION, SEND BY POST TO THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY THROUGH POST, FOR THE AY 2018-19

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →