N G Gangadevi vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/25950/2022HC KeralaKLHC01054776202212 August 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the National Faceless Appeal Centre to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P4) within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. This direction was to be in accordance with law and after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Crucially, the Court ordered that any proceedings for the recovery of amounts due under Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on Ext.P4. The National Faceless Appeal Centre was also instructed to give priority to the hearing of Ext.P4, acknowledging that the appeal was filed in 2014. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment itself, but rather on the procedural delay and the consequent recovery action.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, N G Gangadevi, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging recovery proceedings initiated against her. These proceedings were based on an assessment order (Ext.P3). The petitioner's primary grievance was that her appeal against the assessment order, filed in 2014, had not been disposed of by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-II) to date. The revenue, represented by the standing counsel, submitted that due to the introduction of the National Faceless System, the appeal would have been transferred to the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The revenue suggested that a direction be issued to this centre for the disposal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings for amounts assessed under Ext.P3 should be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the petitioner's appeal filed in 2014 (question of mixed law and fact, concerning the procedural fairness and delay in appeal disposal). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings were being initiated while her appeal, filed in 2014, remained pending, causing her prejudice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue submitted that the appeal, after the introduction of the National Faceless System, would have been transferred to the National Faceless Appeal Centre. They suggested that a direction be issued to this centre to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.

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 GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25950 OF 2022 PETITIONER: N G GANGADEVI AGED 68 YEARS WIFE OF SHRI. C N VENUGOPALAN, "NANDANAM" KESARI JUNCTION, N PARAVUR PIN- 683 513 IN ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513 BY ADVS. LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN GEORGE A.CHERIAN GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.) RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS-II), G- 51, PARAPILLY LANE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN - 682036 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, K A P COMPLEX, R S ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P (C) No.25950/2022 -2-

J U D G M E N T Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that proceedings are being initiated to recover amounts assessed in terms of Ext.P3, pending consideration of the appeal.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the appeal was filed in the year 2014 and has not been disposed of till date.

3.

The learned standing counsel appearing for respondent/department would point out that on the introduction of National Faceless System, the appeal would have been transferred to the National Faceless Appeal centre and a direction may have to be issued to the National Faceless Appeal Centre to dispose of Ext.P4 appeal in accordance with law.

4.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions made on either side, this writ petition is disposed of directing the National Faceless Appeal centre to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal in accordance with law and after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till such time as orders are passed on Ext.P4, any proceedings for recovery of the amounts due under Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance. The National Faceless Appeal centre shall give priority to the hearing of Ext.P4 appeal considering the fact that the appeal was filed in the year 2014. GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG

W.P (C) No.25950/2022 -3-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25950/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.07.2008 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DATED 14.03.12 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.09.2014 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 23.10.2014 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.6.2018

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →