THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/29085/2022HC KeralaKLHC01061555202206 September 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that it would be just and proper to defer coercive proceedings until the petitioner's stay petition was considered, given that a statutory appeal was pending. The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 1st respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) III) to consider the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P3) and stay petition (Ext.P4) and dispose of them in accordance with law within a period of two months. The operative direction was that coercive proceedings, if any, shall be deferred until the disposal of the stay petition (Ext.P4). No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Thomas John Muthoot, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging a notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He had already preferred an appeal and a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) III. The petitioner sought a direction for the consideration of his appeal and stay petition and for a deferral of coercive proceedings until the stay petition was decided. The respondents were the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) III and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle.

What were the issues?

1. Whether coercive proceedings should be deferred pending the consideration of the petitioner's stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) III, given that a statutory appeal is pending. Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that since a statutory appeal and a stay petition were pending before the appellate authority, it would be just and proper to defer any coercive proceedings until the stay petition was considered. The petitioner sought the High Court's intervention to ensure this. The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue side regarding this specific point, other than their representation through the Standing Counsel.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C) NO. 29085 OF 2022
WP (C) NO.20772/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH TUE AY, THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022/ 15TH BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 29085 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT AGED 60 YEARS S/O MATHEW M THOMAS, MUTHOOT HOUSE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689641 BY ADVS. G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR) AKHIL SURESH ANU BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR ATHUL M.V. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III POORNIMA, 28/243, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN - 682036 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P O TRIVANDRUM, PIN – 695003 SHRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

..2.. JUDGMENT Dated this the 06th day of September, 2022 Against Ext.P1 notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

3.

As statutory appeal is pending, it will be only just and proper that coercive proceedings, if any, are deferred till stay petition of the petitioner is considered. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 petition shall be considered within a period of two months. Coercive proceedings, if any, shall be deferred till the disposal of Ext.P4. N. NAGARESH, JUDGE skj ..3..

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29085/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AY 2020-21 DATED 30.03.2022. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.07.2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.04.2022 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21.07.2022 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP (C) NO.20772/2022 DATED 27.06.2022 OF THIS COURT.

More judgments on Section 156

All 694 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →