MAHESH BALAKRISHNAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/2693/2024HC KeralaKLHC01005836202424 January 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the assessment order or the appeal. Instead, it disposed of the writ petition by issuing a direction to the first respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law, on the condonation of delay application and the stay petition. This order was to be passed preferably within a period of two months from the date of the judgment. The court did not issue a writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order, nor did it grant a stay on recovery proceedings directly. The primary relief granted was a direction for expeditious disposal of the pending applications before the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mahesh Balakrishnan, proprietor of Balakrishna Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an assessment order (Exhibit P1) and a demand notice (Exhibit P2) issued by the respondents, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Assessment Unit of the Income Tax Department. The petitioner had filed an appeal against the assessment order in 2022 with a delay, and subsequently filed a stay petition on December 24, 2023. Facing recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the appellate authority to adjudicate the appeal and stay petition expeditiously.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of certiorari to quash the assessment order (Exhibit P1)? 2. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus to prevent recovery proceedings based on the demand notice (Exhibit P2) until the appeal is adjudicated? 3. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the appeal (Exhibit P3) and stay petition (Exhibit P5) within a stipulated time? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner sought to quash the assessment order and prevent recovery proceedings. He also prayed for a direction to the appellate authority to expeditiously dispose of his appeal and stay petition, as he was facing recovery actions. The petitioner relied on the fact that an appeal and stay petition were pending. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 4TH MAGHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 2693 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: MAHESH BALAKRISHNAN AGED 70 YEARS S/O BALAKRISHNAN PROPRIETOR OF BALAKRISHNA ENTERPRISES, T.B. JUNCTION, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695121, RESIDING AT 9-119, MASTHAN VILA VEEDU, MUNDAPURAM CHIRYAYINKIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695043 BY ADVS. GODWIN JOSEPH NAVEEN.R RESPONDENT/S: 1 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), TRIVANDRUM, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 2693 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 24th day of January, 2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- “I. To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Exhibit P1 Assessment Order. I I. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents not to proceed with recovery proceedings to realize the amount demanded in Exhibit P2 Demand Notice, in pursuant to Exhibit P1 Assessment Order, till Exhibit P3 Appeal is adjudicated on merits and communicated to this Petitioner. III. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to consider and dispose Exhibit P3 Appeal and Exhibit P5 Stay Petition within a time stipulated by this Hon’ble Court.” 2.Though the petitioner has filed the appeal in Ext.P3 with some delay in the year 2022 itself, but he has filed the stay petition only on 24.12.2023. Now the petitioner is facing the recovery proceedings against in pursuance to the assessment order and therefore he has approached this court in this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus to the appellate authority, to consider and pass orders on condonation of delay, applications for stay petition and appeal, expeditiously. Considering the aforesaid prayer, the present writ petition is

WP(C) NO. 2693 OF 2024 3 disposed of with direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law on condonation of delay application as well as the stay petition preferably within a period of two months from today. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE SJ

WP(C) NO. 2693 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2693/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1041588812(1) DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P1(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION SHEET DIN NO. ITBA/AST/S/213/2021-22/1041588823(1) DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO. ITBA/AST/S/156/2021 22/1041588833(1) DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED TO THIS PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN FORM NO. 35 SUBMITTED ON 07.08.2022 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. 359184281300923 DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE IT DEPARTMENT TO THIS PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THIS PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. 571146761241223 ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT TO THIS PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE FIRST APPEAL PROCEEDINGS WITH REGARD TO THIS PETITIONER AS OBTAINED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.09.2023 IN W.P.(C) NO. 27445/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →