HARIDAS, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/7064/2024HC KeralaKLHC01084940202423 February 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the assessee. The Court found no grounds to grant any indulgence to the petitioner, noting his lack of cooperation in assessment proceedings and that the appellate order was rendered ex-parte. The Court stated that such a petitioner is not entitled to any relief. However, despite dismissing the writ petition, the Court directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider the stay petition filed along with the appeal expeditiously. The primary reason for dismissal was the petitioner's non-cooperation and failure to deposit tax dues, rendering him disentitled to extraordinary relief from the High Court. The issue of the merits of the appeal before the ITAT was not decided by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Haridas, an assessee in the real estate business, failed to file income tax returns for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after noticing the sale of a property for Rs. 49,19,000 on 25.04.2013 and other property purchases. Notices under Section 148 and Section 142(1) were issued and served, but the petitioner did not respond or cooperate. Consequently, the ITO completed the assessment under Section 144, adding Rs. 78,13,969 to the nil income, leading to demands for tax, interest, and initiation of penalty proceedings. The petitioner's appeal against this assessment order was dismissed. He then filed a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) along with a stay petition, but had not deposited any tax dues, which amounted to Rs. 46,57,980 plus interest and penalty.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to consider and pass orders on his appeal and stay petition for AY 2014-15 expeditiously? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the Income Tax Department not to take further recovery proceedings pending the disposal of his appeal and stay petition by the ITAT? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner sought directions for the ITAT to expedite the disposal of his appeal and stay petition and for the revenue to stay recovery proceedings. The judgment does not explicitly record the assessee's arguments beyond the prayers in the writ petition. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue's stance, as reflected in the court's reasoning, is that the petitioner has not cooperated with assessment and appellate proceedings, has a significant tax liability, and has not deposited any dues, thus disentitling him to relief.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144

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 FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 7064 OF 2024 PETITIONER: HARIDAS, AGED 58 YEARS MANGALATH HOUSE, POTHOOR P.O, KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673121 BY ADV S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KALPETTA, SULTHAN BATHERY ROAD, KAINATTY, KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673122 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001 3 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN,KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,COCHIN, PIN - 682030 P.G. JAYASHANKAR-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC No 7064 of 2024 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2024 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs: (i) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent – Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, Cochin to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P3 appeal and /or Exhibit P4 stay petition for the AY 2014-15, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a time limit as may be fixed by this Honourable Court. (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents/income tax department not to take any further proceedings based on Exhibit P1 assessment order for the AY 2014-15 pending final disposal of Exhibit P3 statutory appeal/Exhibit P4 stay petition by the 3rd respondent (iii) To issue such other appropriate writ, order or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper to issue in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The assessment year is of 2014-15. The petitioner, who is an assessee under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘I.T Act,1961’) is in the business of real estate. The petitioner did not file returns of his income for the assessment year 2014-15. As per the ITS information it was noticed that the assessee had sold a landed property of an extent 5.67

WPC No 7064 of 2024 3 ares of land for a sale consideration of Rs.49,19,000/- on 25.04.2013. The petitioner had also purchased certain other properties during the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2014-15. In view thereof, the petitioner’s case was re-opened under Section 147 of the I.T Act, 1961. 3. Notice under Section 148 was issued to the petitioner on 09.01.2018 after taking prior approval from the Joint Commissioner of the Income Tax of the concerned Range. Physical copy of the said notice was served on the petitioner on 16.01.2018 besides on the portal and email. The petitioner choose not to file return of his income, despite the service of notice. Further notice under Section 142(1) was issued and served on the petitioner on 04.09.2018. Physical copy of the same was also served on the petitioner on 11.09.2018. The petitioner did not give any response to the said notice as well. The petitioner was not co-operating with the departmental proceedings nor furnishing any details in respect of the income generated from the sale of the

WPC No 7064 of 2024 4 property and therefore, it was decided to complete the assessment based on the materials available with the department under Section 144 of the I.T Act,1961. The total income of Rs.78,13,969/- was added to the return nil income on which the tax interest have been demanded and the penalty proceedings have been initiated. 4. The petitioner had filed appeal against the said assessment order. However, the appeal came to be dismissed vide Ext.P2 order, against which the petitioner has filed appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Despite the huge liability of the tax, the petitioner had not deposited a single penny. Besides the liability of tax of Rs. 46,57,980/-, there are interest and penalty. The petitioner now wants this Court to stay the recovery of the dues as per the assessment order. This Court finds no ground to grant any indulgence to the petitioner. The petitioner has not co-operated in completion of the assessment proceedings, even the appellate order was rendered ex-parte. Such petitioner is

WPC No 7064 of 2024 5 not entitled for any relief from this Court. Therefore, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. However, despite the dismissal of this writ petition, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should consider the stay petition filed along with the appeal expeditiously. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP

WPC No 7064 of 2024 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7064/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21- 11-2018 UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2014-15 ALONG WITH THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17-3-2023 PASSED BY THE CIT (APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI FOR THE AY 2014-15 Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE SECOND APPEAL DATED 8-1- 2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2014-15 ALONG WITH THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION Exhibit P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 19-2- 2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2014-15

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →