SREENI PARAMESWARAN vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8567/2023HC KeralaKLHC01019773202314 March 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, after hearing both sides, was inclined to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the second respondent (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) to take up the stay petition (Ext.P4) and pass orders on it within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court directed that all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The judgment does not record any decision on the merits of the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of expeditious disposal and interim relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sreeni Parameswaran, is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2011-2012 (Ext.P1). The petitioner's appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, was rejected by order Ext.P2. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner filed a further appeal (Ext.P3) along with a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The present writ petition (civil) has been filed seeking expeditious disposal of the pending appeal and stay petition before the ITAT. The petitioner is represented by advocates Harisankar V. Menon, Meera V. Menon, R. Sreejith, and K. Krishna. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, represented by Standing Counsel Sri. Jose Joseph.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal should be directed to expeditiously dispose of the pending appeal and stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency). The petitioner seeks an expeditious disposal of their appeal and stay petition before the ITAT. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, was heard. No specific arguments or contentions from either side regarding the merits of the appeal or the stay petition were recorded in the judgment.

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 VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 8567 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: SREENI PARAMESWARAN 7/42 - B5, MYSTIC BELLS VILLA NO -1, EROOR DESOM, NADAMA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682308 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2 (1), I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682018 2 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 1ST FLOOR, BLOCK C-I & C-II, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682037 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL ITD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No.8567 of 2023 2 VIJU ABRAHAM, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.8567 of 2023 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of March, 2023

J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is the assessment order in respect of the year 2011-2012. Against the said order, the petitioner had preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, which was rejected by Ext.P2 order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4 stay petition. The petitioner seeks for an expeditious disposal of Exts.P3 and P4. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

Having heard both sides, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition, with direction to the second respondent to take up Ext.P4 stay petition and pass orders on the same, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till a decision is taken as directed above, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE rkj

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8567/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 DTD. 28-03-2016 Exhibit P2 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI DTD. 20-01- 2023 Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 28-02-2023 Exhibit P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 02-03-2023 Exhibit P5 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 30-09-2022 Exhibit P6 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 08-02-2023 Exhibit P7 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 22-02-2023

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →