HOTEL AMBASSADOR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/29874/2017HC KeralaKLHC01077819201722 August 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the submission that the issue was covered by a previous judgment in W.P.(C.) No.29840/2017, allowed the writ petition. The impugned order, Ext.P6, was set aside. The Court directed the concerned Income Tax authority to consider the petitioner's application for waiver of interest (Ext.P3) after hearing the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The petitioner was also directed to appear before the appropriate authority, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ernakulam, within 15 days to make submissions in support of their application. The Court did not decide on the deemed allowance of the waiver application but remanded it for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Hotel Ambassador, represented by its Managing Partner, Mr. Jacob Kurian, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition sought to quash Ext.P6, declare that their application for waiver of interest (Ext.P3) was deemed allowed due to non-consideration within the time fixed by the Finance Act, 2016, and direct the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax to keep in abeyance proceedings for collection of interest (Ext.P2 and P6). The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the filing of the writ petition challenging the order Ext.P6 and seeking directions regarding the interest waiver application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the application for waiver of interest filed by the petitioner is deemed to have been allowed due to the non-consideration by the Income Tax authority within the time stipulated by the Finance Act, 2016? (Question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of Finance Act, 2016 provisions related to time limits for considering waiver applications). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that their application for waiver of interest (Ext.P3) should be deemed allowed as it was not considered within the time fixed by the Finance Act, 2016. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not explicitly record any argument in the judgment. However, their presence as respondents indicates opposition to the petitioner's claims.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 31ST SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 29874 OF 2017 PETITIONER: HOTEL AMBASSADOR K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,MR. JACOB KURIAN BY ADV SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING,SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM PIN-686001 2 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM PIN- 686001 BY ADVS. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON SR. JOSE JOSEPH-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.29874 of 2017 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2023 1. Heard Sri. Ramesh Cherian John, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs: i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or direction quashing Ext.P6. ii) Declare that the application for waiver of interest filed as per Ext.P3 is deemed to be allowed in view of the non-consideration of the waiver petition within the time fixed by Finance Act, 2016. iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or direction to the 1st respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings for collection of interest pursuant to Ext.P2 and P6. iv) Issue any other writ or direction this Honourable Court deems fit considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department WPC No.29874 of 2017 3 unanimously submitted that the issue involved is covered by the judgment dated 06.07.2023 passed in W.P.(C.) No.29840/2017. 4. Considering the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order, Ext.P6 is set aside. Concerned Income Tax authority is directed to consider Ext.P3 application after hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to appear before the appropriate authority/ the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ernakulam, within a period of 15 days and make submissions in support of the application. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP WPC No.29874 of 2017 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29874/2017 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF THETRIBUNAL DT.11.11.2010 EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.10.01.2011 GIVING

EXHIBIT P2(A):OF THE ORDER DT.10.06.2013 PASSED U/S 154 OF THE ACT EXHIBIT P3:OF THE APPLICATION/PETITION FOR WAIVER OF INEREST DT.05.07.2013 (WITHOUT ANNEXURES) EXHIBIT P4:OF THE POSTING NOTICE DT.26.05.2017 EXHIBIT P5:OF THE REQUEST DT.30.5.2017 SEEKING FOR A SHORT ADJOURNMENT EXHIBIT P6:OF THE ORDER DT.14.7.2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →