RAJESH VELIMPARAMBIL GOPALAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala, in its limited writ jurisdiction, disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. The Court directed the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to take up the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P3) and to hear and dispose of the stay petition within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that coercive steps for recovery of the demand shall be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the stay petition. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment or the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of timely disposal.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Rajesh Veliparambil Gopalan, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the timely disposal of his appeal and stay petition. The appeal was filed against an assessment order (Ext.P1) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) was also filed. The 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, was the authority against whom the direction was sought. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The writ petition was admitted, and notice was taken by the standing counsel for the respondents.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the expeditious disposal of his appeal and stay petition filed before the 2nd respondent? (Question of law and fact) The petitioner's contention is that the 2nd respondent should be directed to dispose of the pending appeal and stay petition. The revenue's contention, as indicated by their counsel taking notice, is not explicitly recorded in terms of arguments for or against the prayer. However, by taking notice, they are implicitly involved in the proceedings.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Admit. DSGI takes notice for the respondents.
The limited prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 appeal filed against Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P3 stay petition.
In view of the limited prayer made in the writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition and hear and dispose of the stay petition within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The coercive steps for recovery shall be kept in abeyance till then. T.R.RAVI sn JUDGE
WP(C) NO. 7999 OF 2023 3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7999/2023 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.03.2022 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30-03-2022 AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 30-03- 2022 Exhibit P3OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 21-12-2022 TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P5OF THE REPLY DATED 27-12-2022 WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 27-12-2022 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //// PA TO JUDGE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
