ABRAHAM KOLATH GEORGE vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/28123/2022HC KeralaKLHC01059480202227 September 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the facts and circumstances and the contentions raised by the petitioner, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the Second Respondent (First Appellate Authority) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. An opportunity of hearing was to be afforded to the petitioner. Crucially, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The principle is that recovery should be deferred pending the decision on a stay application before the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Abraham Kolath George, has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. He is aggrieved by recovery proceedings initiated against him to recover amounts due under an order of assessment (Ext.P1). This is happening while his appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) are pending before the First Appellate Authority, who is the second respondent. The petitioner seeks relief from these recovery proceedings. The respondents are represented by their respective counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings can be initiated against the assessee when an appeal and a stay petition are pending before the First Appellate Authority? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that recovery proceedings are being initiated prematurely, despite the pendency of his appeal and stay petition before the appellate authority. He seeks to halt these recovery actions until his appeal is decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent was heard, but does not detail their specific arguments regarding the recovery proceedings or the stay petition.

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. TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 5TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 28123 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: ABRAHAM KOLATH GEORGE AGED 51 YEARS KOLATH HOUSE, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O., PALAKKAD , PIN - 678731 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE NATIONAL FACELES APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, REPRESENTED BY 27799THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PIN - 110001 3 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 & TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, ENGLISH CHURCH ROAD, PALAKKAD , PIN - 678014 BY ADVS. JOSE JOSEPH P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.)(R-348) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 28123 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved by the fact that recovery proceedings are being initiated against the petitioner to recover amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment at the time when Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition is pending consideration before the First Appellate Authority (the 2nd respondent).

Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent also.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext..P3stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such a decision is taken on Ext.P3, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner in respect of Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be kept in abeyance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P., JUDGE ajt

WP(C) NO. 28123 OF 2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28123/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DTD. 30-03- 2022 Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 29-04-2022 Exhibit P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. NIL Exhibit P4 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 22-07-2022

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →