SASHI RAGHAVAN KUMAR vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/33098/2023HC KeralaKLHC01073627202316 October 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering that the petitioner was facing a demand notice and that his delay and stay petitions were pending, directed the 2nd respondent to decide the delay petition. If the delay is condoned, the 2nd respondent is further directed to dispose of the stay petition within a period of two months. The Court issued this direction to ensure that the petitioner's grievances regarding the appeal and stay are addressed before the demand is enforced. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sashi Raghavan Kumar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi) to dispose of his appeal (Ext.P2), delay petition (Ext.P3), and stay petition (Ext.P4). There was a delay of 24 days in filing the appeal. The petitioner contended that without a decision on the delay and stay petitions, the 1st respondent (Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi) had issued a demand notice for Rs. 49,02,636/-. The petitioner sought to prevent this demand from being enforced while his appeal and stay were pending.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Court should direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the pending appeal, delay petition, and stay petition filed by the petitioner. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that a demand notice for Rs. 49,02,636/- had been issued by the 1st respondent without a decision on his delay and stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. This situation necessitated immediate intervention to prevent undue hardship. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. The court proceeded to issue directions based on the facts presented by the petitioner.

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 MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 33098 OF 2023 PETITIONER: SASHI RAGHAVAN KUMAR AGED 66 YEARS S/O. RAGHAVAN KUMAR, PATHIRUVELIL HOUSE, MALLAPPALLY, EZHUMATTOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 689586 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA PARVATHY MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 ADV.JOSE JOSEPH -SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 16th day of October, 2023

1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: (i) To direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal, Ext.P3 delay petition and Ext.P4 stay petition by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction. (ii) To grant the petitioner such other incidental reliefs including the costs of these proceedings.

2.

There is a delay of 24 days in filing Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. However, without taking a decision on Ext.P3 delay petition and Ext.P4 stay petition, the 1st respondent has issued Ext.P1 notice to the petitioner demanding to pay amount of Rs. 49,02,636/-.

3.

Considering the aforesaid facts, as the petitioner is facing the demand notice, the 2nd respondent is directed to decide the delay petition and if the delay is condoned, dispose of Ext.P4 stay petition within a period of two months.

4.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33098/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPYOF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2018-19,DTD. 29-03- 2023 Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BYTHE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 22-05-2023 Exhibit P3 COPYOF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 22-05-2023 Exhibit P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 22-05-2023 Exhibit P5 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 29879/23 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 20-09-2023 Exhibit P6 COPY OF RETURN OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DTD. 11-04-2022 Exhibit P7 COPY OF INSURANCE POLICY OF STAR HEALTH & ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,. DTD. 30-03- 2020

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →