THAYYIL BALAKRISHNAN PRADEEP, vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: THAYYIL BALAKRISHNAN PRADEEP, AGED 56 YEARS S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM, PALISSERI, THRISSUR., PIN - 680027 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA PARVATHY MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD 2 (2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH- SR.SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 2 J U D G M E N T The present writ petition has been filed mainly seeking the following prayers: “(i) To quash Ext.P5 issued by the 2nd respondent by the issue of a writ of certiorari or such other writ or order or direction. (ii) To direct the 2nd respondent to furnish copies of the survey report as prayed for in Ext.P4 application, at the earliest by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction.” 2. Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue, submits that the petitioner, in fact, is asking for a direction from this Court for providing survey report prepared by the survey team while conducting survey under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He further submits that the survey report prepared at the time of survey in Form-E was handed over to the petitioner. It is also submitted that while finalising the assessment proceedings, the internal survey report prepared

WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 3 for departmental convenience has not been relied upon. The petitioner is already in appeal against the assessment order. Every document and statement relied upon by the assessing authority was supplied to the petitioner. Considering the fact that the petitioner is already in appeal against the assessment order, he is entitled to take every ground, which is available to him under the law. However, there is no question of entertaining this writ petition, which this Court finds nothing but a tactics applied by the petitioner to delay the conclusion of the appellate proceedings. If the petitioner feels that some documents relied upon by the assessing authority have not been supplied to him despite demand, the same may be a ground to challenge the assessment order. But, at this belated stage, the petitioner cannot approach this Court for a direction for supply of the documents/report. I find that this writ petition is nothing, but an abuse of process of court and the

same

hereby

dismissed. Pending

WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 4 interlocutory application, if any, in the present writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH

JUDGE jg

WP(C) NO. 19157 OF 2023 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19157/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DTD. 21-03- 2022 Exhibit P2 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DTD. 23-03- 2022 Exhibit P3 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DTD. 24-03- 2022 Exhibit P4 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. NIL Exhibit P5 COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 03-05-2023 Exhibit P6 COPY OF ORDER IN FILE NO. 414/105/2008-IT (INV.I) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI DTD. 30-11-2009