RAJAKUMARI SHOPPING MALL LLP vs. ADDITIONAL/ JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/14612/2022HC KeralaKLHC01029461202226 April 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while considering the writ petition, acknowledged the petitioner's grievance regarding the apprehension of coercive proceedings before their stay petition is decided by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court found merit in directing the Tribunal to consider the stay petition expeditiously. Accordingly, the Tribunal was directed to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P6) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until a decision is taken on the stay petition, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P4) were ordered to be kept in abeyance. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rajakumari Shopping Mall LLP, is aggrieved by an order of assessment for the assessment year 2016-17, marked as Ext.P1. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent), a copy of which is Ext.P5. Concurrently, a petition for stay of proceedings (Ext.P6) was filed. The petitioner apprehends coercive recovery proceedings before their stay petition is adjudicated. Consequently, they have filed this writ petition seeking intervention. The respondents include various income tax authorities and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to have coercive proceedings stayed pending the disposal of their stay petition before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal? The petitioner argued that they have filed an appeal and a stay petition, and they apprehend coercive action before the stay petition is considered. They seek a direction for the expeditious disposal of the stay petition and a stay on coercive proceedings in the interim. The respondents did not record any specific arguments against the petitioner's plea for a stay on coercive proceedings pending the disposal of the stay petition. The court considered the submissions of both parties.

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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 6TH VAISAKHA, 1944 W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022 PETI TIONER: RAJAKUMARI SHOPPING MALL LLP AMC 11/1556, CITY PLAZA, NH ROAD, ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM-695 101 REPRESENTED BY DESIGNATED PARTNER. BY ADVS.ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 4TH FLOOR, KOWDIAR P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695 003. 3 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 1ST FLOOR, BLOCK C-I & C-II, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD-682 037 REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR. ADV. RESMITHA R. CHANDRAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2016-17, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P5. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P6. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.

2.

Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.

3.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE bpr

-3- W.P.(C) NO.14612 OF 2022

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14612/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17.03.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →