MUHAMMEED BADIR A., vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

WP(C)/9702/2024HC KeralaKLHC01090348202412 March 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P3) after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Furthermore, the Court ordered that any proceedings for the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall remain suspended until such time as orders are passed on the stay application. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the stay application itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of hearing the petitioner before deciding the stay application and granting a temporary stay on recovery.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Muhammeed Badir A., is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2021-22. He filed an appeal against this order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, along with an application for stay. The petitioner's primary request is for the stay application to be disposed of after providing him an opportunity of hearing. He also sought a stay on recovery proceedings until a decision is made on the stay application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should consider and pass orders on the stay application (Ext.P3) after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner? 2. Whether proceedings for recovery of amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) should remain suspended until orders are passed on the stay application (Ext.P3)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the 2nd respondent should dispose of the stay application after providing a hearing. He also requested that recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance until the stay application is decided. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department was heard, but no specific arguments were recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 9702 OF 2024 PETITIONER(S): MUHAMMEED BADIR A., AGED 26 YEARS AYYAM MADAKKAL, CHEMBULANGAD, CHERUKUDANGAD P.O, PARUDUR, PALAKKAD, PIN – 679305 BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR G.REMADEVI HARIMA HARIHARAN RAJATH R NATH DHEERAJ SASIDHARAN SREE HARIDEV RESPONDENT(S): 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 BY ADV. P.R. AJITH KUMAR, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C.)NO.9702 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 12th day of March, 2024 The petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for the assessment year 2021-22, under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 order of assessment before the 2nd respondent, along with Ext.P3 application for stay. 2. Adv. Sree Haridev, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the only relief sought for by the petitioner is that, Ext.P3 application for stay may be disposed of by the 2nd respondent, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He prays that, till such time orders are passed in Ext.P3, any proceedings for recovery of the amounts due under Ext.P1 may be kept in abeyance. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department also.

W.P.(C.)NO.9702 OF 2024 3 Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department, this Writ Petition will stand disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time as orders are passed on Ext.P3, any proceedings for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall remain suspended. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE NB/12-3

W.P.(C.)NO.9702 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9702/2024 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 06-02-2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 02-03-2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT. P1 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 02-03-2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT. P2 APPEAL RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →