BETTY VARGHESE vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT/COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/29153/2022HC KeralaKLHC01061713202201 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent (Income Tax Officer) to grant credit for all amounts paid by the petitioner as self-assessment tax in respect of assessment year 2015-16. The Court further directed that any recovery of amount due, pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P8), should only proceed if a demand exists after giving credit for the self-assessment tax paid. The Court did not explicitly address the issue of natural justice violation or failure to consider the return of income, implicitly resolving it by directing the credit, which would negate any demand.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Betty Varghese, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging the finalization of her assessment for assessment year 2015-16. She contended that the Assessing Officer (2nd respondent) failed to give credit for the self-assessment tax paid by her. Furthermore, she argued that the assessment was completed without providing her a proper opportunity to be heard and without considering her return of income. The petitioner stated that if proper credit for self-assessment tax was given, there would be no demand against her. She sought a direction to the Assessing Authority to grant this credit.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Assessing Officer erred in finalizing the assessment for assessment year 2015-16 without granting credit for the self-assessment tax paid by the petitioner? 2. Whether the assessment was completed in violation of principles of natural justice by not providing a proper opportunity to the petitioner and not considering her return of income? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessment was finalized without giving credit for self-assessment tax paid. She contended that if this credit was given, no demand would arise. She sought a direction for the Assessing Authority to grant this credit. The petitioner also raised concerns about the lack of proper opportunity and consideration of her return of income during the assessment process. Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel for the respondent Department stated that they had no objection to a direction being issued to the 2nd respondent to grant credit for the self-assessment tax paid by the petitioner.

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. THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 29153 OF 2022 PETITIONER 1 BETTY VARGHESE D/O. JACOB VARGHESE AGED 36 YEARS MANKOOTTATHIL VEEDU, KUMMALLOOR ROAD,KOIPADU,CHATHANNOOR,KOLLAM, PIN - 691572 BY ADVS. MARTHANDA VARMA PANDALAI.K S.HEMALATHA RESPONDENT S : 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT/COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT,DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-2,RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001 3 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -13( 3),HYDERABAD, PIN - 500084 BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.29153 of 2022 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 01st day of December, 2022 The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that while finalising the assessment of the petitioner for assessment year 2015-16, the Assessing Officer has not given credit to the amount of Self assessment Tax available to the petitioner. It is also submitted that the assessment was completed without giving to the petitioner a proper opportunity and without considering the return of income filed by the petitioner. 2. When this matter is taken up for consideration today, it is submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there will be no demand against the petitioner if proper credit is given to the Self Assessment Tax paid by the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner will therefore be satisfied with a direction being given to the Assessing Authority (2nd WPC No.29153 of 2022 3 respondent) to give credit to the Self Assessment Tax paid by the petitioner for assessment year 2015-16. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Department states that he has no objection in such a direction being issued to the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to give credit for all amounts paid by the petitioner as Self Assessment Tax in respect of assessment year 2015-16 and to proceed to recover any amount due in terms of Ext.P8 order of assessment only if any demand exists after giving credit to the amount of Self Assessment Tax paid by the petitioner. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE SKP/01-12 WPC No.29153 of 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29153/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 NOTICE U/S.148 EXHIBIT P2 NOTICE U/S 144 EXHIBIT P3 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE EXHIBIT P4 REPLY LETTER BY PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RETURN EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF TAX COMPUTATION EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF CHALAN EXHIBIT P8

EXHIBIT P9 PENALTY NOTICE U/S 271(1)(C) EXHIBIT P10 PENALTY NOTICE U/S 271(1)(B) OF THE IT ACT DT12-3-2022 EXHIBIT P11 PENALTY NOTICE U/S 271F OF THE IT ACT DT.12-3- 2022 EXHIBIT P12 DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT DT.12-3- 2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NILP.A. TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →