JETRUDE RANIJASMINE vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent (National Faceless Appeal Centre) to provide a link to enable the petitioner to upload a stay petition concerning Ext.P3 appeal. This action is to be completed within ten days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment. Furthermore, if the petitioner files a stay petition within two weeks of the link being provided, all recovery proceedings for the amount due under Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is made on the stay petition. The court did not decide the merits of the appeal or the stay petition itself, but rather facilitated the process for the petitioner to file the stay petition before the correct forum.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Jetrude Rani Jasmine, filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) challenging an assessment order (Ext.P2). The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala because recovery proceedings were initiated while the appeal was pending. The respondent department stated that the petitioner had filed the appeal before the NFAC, but the stay petition was filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who lacked the competence to decide it. The petitioner's counsel requested a link to file a stay petition before the NFAC and for recovery proceedings to be stayed until a decision on the stay petition.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is competent to decide a stay petition when the appeal is filed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings were being initiated while their appeal was pending before the NFAC, and they sought a mechanism to file a stay petition before the appropriate authority. They requested a link to file the stay petition with the NFAC and for recovery proceedings to be kept in abeyance. Revenue's contention: The respondent department contended that the petitioner had filed the appeal before the NFAC, but the stay petition was filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who was not competent to decide it in this scenario.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
J U D G M E N T Petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal challenging Ext.P2 order of assessment before the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that, pending consideration of the appeal filed by the petitioner, proceedings are being initiated to recover the amount due under Ext.P2 order of assessment.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondent department states that the petitioner has filed the appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre. However, the petition seeking stay of proceedings has been filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who is not competent to decide the stay petition as the appeal is filed before the National Faceless Appeal Centre.
Faced with this situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner says that if a link is provided to file a stay petition before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, the petitioner will file such stay petition and a direction may be issued to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance till a decision is taken on the stay petition to be filed by the petitioner.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to provide a link to enable the petitioner to upload a stay petition in Ext.P3 appeal filed by the petitioner. This shall be done within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. If the petitioner files a stay petition within two weeks from the date of which a link is provided to the petitioner, further proceedings to recover any amount due under Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken on the stay petition to be filed by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG
W.P (C) No.25887/2022 -3-
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026