Pulikkottil Lazar and Sons Jewellery vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/2980/2023HC KeralaKLHC01007174202330 January 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P5) after hearing the petitioner at the earliest, and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also directed that coercive steps for recovery shall be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the stay application. The judgment did not delve into the merits of the appeal or the assessment order itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of expediting the stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pulikkottil Lazar and Sons Jewellery, filed an appeal (Ext.P4) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [2nd respondent] against an assessment order (Ext.P3). Concurrently, the petitioner filed an application for stay of recovery (Ext.P5) based on the assessment order. Both the appeal and the stay application were pending consideration before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala by way of a writ petition (civil) seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of the stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when statutory remedies of appeal and stay are available and pending before the appellate authority? The petitioner argued that their appeal and stay petition are pending and sought a direction for early disposal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. The core of the matter is the petitioner's plea for judicial intervention to expedite the consideration of their pending stay application before the appellate authority, given the potential for coercive recovery steps.

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 T.R.RAVI MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 10TH MAGHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 2980 OF 2023 PETITIONER: PULIKKOTTIL LAZAR AND SONS JEWELLERY PULIKKOTTIL LAZAR & SONS, KECHERY, THRISSUR KECHERY- 680501, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.JIMMY VARGHESE.P BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU P.K.BIJU ANJANA A. RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC),NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 & TPS, CITY PLAZA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, WEST NADA, GURUVAYOOR, PIN - 680101 SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 2980 OF 2023 2 T.R. RAVI, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.2980 of 2023 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2023

JUDGMENT The petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal before the 2nd respondent against the assessment order Ext.P3. He has also preferred an application for stay of recovery based on Ext.P3 order which has been produced as Ext.P5. It is submitted that Exts.P4 and P5 are pending for consideration. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 stay petition after hearing the petitioner at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The coercive steps for recovery shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of Ext.P5 application. T.R.RAVI JUDGE LEK

WP(C) NO. 2980 OF 2023 3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2980/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 8.12.2022 SERVED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.12.2022 Exhibit P3OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.12.2022 FOR A.Y 2021-22 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.01.2023 Exhibit P5OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.01.2023 Exhibit P6OF THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SEC. 220(6) BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.01.2023 Exhibit P7OF THE ORDER DATED 20.1.2023 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →