P.M. AZEEZ, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/20190/2022HC KeralaKLHC01041544202226 July 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that there is an equally efficacious alternate remedy available to the assessee under the Income Tax Act itself. Therefore, the Court would not entertain a writ petition against an assessment order or an order passed on an application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under the Income Tax Act against the assessment order and the order passed on the application under Section 154. If the petitioner files an appeal within 30 days from the date of the order, the appeal shall be decided on merit in accordance with law. The constitutional validity of Section 144B and the Faceless Assessment Scheme was not decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, P.M. Azeez, aged 68 years, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking to set aside Ext.P1 and P7 orders, and to direct the Income Tax Officer to pass a fresh rectified order after providing an effective opportunity of hearing. The petitioner also sought to prevent enforcement of the demand as per Ext.P1 order and to declare Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Faceless Assessment Scheme unconstitutional. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & TPS, and the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The writ petition was filed seeking these reliefs.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition against an assessment order or an order passed on an application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when an equally efficacious alternate remedy is available. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought to set aside the assessment and rectification orders, direct a fresh rectified order with an opportunity of hearing, prevent enforcement of the demand, and declare Section 144B and the Faceless Assessment Scheme unconstitutional. The petitioner implicitly argued for the High Court's intervention by filing the writ petition. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, would likely argue that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 144B

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 WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 20190 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: P.M. AZEEZ, AGED 68 YEARS PADINJARECHALIL HOUSE, KAVUMKARA, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 673. BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR HARIMA HARIHARAN RAJATH R NATH G.REMADEVI RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, MAHIMA TOWERS, TEMPLE ROAD, THODUPUZHA, PIN-685 584. 2 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOMET TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN-110 001. BY SC SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.20190 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT The present writ petition has been filing seeking the following reliefs: (i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders direction setting aside Ext.P1 and P7 orders; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders directing the 1st respondent to pass a fresh rectified order after providing the petitioner an effective opportunity of hearing; (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders directing the respondents or any other person acting on their behalf not to enforce the demand as per Ext.P1 order; (iv) declare Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Faceless Assessment Scheme brought into effect under the same to be constitutionally invalid in so far as they violate the provisions of the Constitution of India

WP(C) NO.20190 OF 2022 3

2.

Admittedly, there is equally efficacious alternate remedy available under the Income Tax Act itself for the assessee - the writ petitioner. This Court would not like to entertain writ petition against the assessment order or the order passed on the application for rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act.

3.

In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under the Income Tax Act against the assessment order and the order passed on the application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If the petitioner approaches the appellate authority within 30 days from today by filing appeal under the Income Tax Act, the appeal shall be decided on merit in accordance with law. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE Shg

WP(C) NO.20190 OF 2022 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20190/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22-03-2022 ISSUED BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT P1 ORDER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION STATEMENT ISSUED BY M/S. ILAHIA TRUST Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11-04-2022 ISSUED BY FEDERAL BANK, MUVATTUPUZHA EAST BRANCH Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION STATEMENT DATED 19- 042022 ISSUED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT Exhibit P7 COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION REJECTION ORDER DATED 03.05-2022 ISSUED BY THE 1STRESPONDENT Exhibit P8 COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C) NO. 27163 OF 2021 DATED 01-12-2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA Exhibit P9 Copy of the notice dated 11-03-2022 issued by the Income Tax Department Exhibit P10 Copy of the certificate dated 24-09-20225 issued by the Chartered Accountant

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →