BENNY JOHN , vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),

WP(C)/16852/2024HC KeralaKLHC01104286202403 May 2024Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction to the 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal directed the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P4) within a period of two months from the date of the order. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings against the petitioner for the amount confirmed by the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until the stay petition is decided. The appeal itself (Ext.P3) was not directly addressed in terms of its disposal timeline, but the stay petition's consideration was prioritized to provide interim relief. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Benny John, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2015-2016. He filed an appeal (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 1st respondent. While these are pending, the 3rd respondent, the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kottayam, initiated recovery proceedings based on a demand notice (Ext.P2). The petitioner's primary grievance is the initiation of recovery actions before the appeal and stay petition are decided. The petitioner's limited prayer is for a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the pending appeal and stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 1st respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending appeal (Ext.P3) and stay petition (Ext.P4)? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings are being initiated despite the pendency of his appeal and stay petition before the appellate authority. He sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of these pending matters. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue's side regarding the issues raised by the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents appeared and was heard.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 13TH VAISAKHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 16852 OF 2024 PETITIONER: BENNY JOHN , AGED 60 YEARS S/O JOHN, ARUKKUZHUPPIL HOUSE, PARAMBRA, KAPPUMTHALA P.O, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686613 BY ADV C.A.JOJO RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, KOTTAYAM-686001 SRI.JOSE JOSEPH - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C).No. 16852 of 2024 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 3rd day of May, 2024 The Income Tax Department has initiated proceedings against the petitioner for the assessment year 2015-2016. Thereafter, Ext.P1 assessment order was passed. Challenging Ext.P1, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the 1st respondent. The petitioner has also moved Ext.P4 stay petition. Exts.P3 and P4 are pending before the 1st respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that, in the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent is initiating steps for recovery of demand as per the demand notice in Ext.P2 order. The limited prayer of the petitioner is to give a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 stay petition and pass orders within a period of two months from today. Till then, the recovery proceedings against the petitioner for recovery of

W.P.(C).No. 16852 of 2024 3 the amount confirmed against him by Ext.P1 order shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH SK JUDGE

W.P.(C).No. 16852 of 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16852/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2015-16 DATED 11.03.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 DATED 11.03.2024 ISSUED BY THE2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM NO.35 DATED 25.03.2024

SUBMITTED

BEFORE

THE

1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10.04.2024

SUBMITTED

BEFORE

THE

1ST RESPONDENT

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →