VARAPPILYKUDI ABDULRAHIMAN SHOUKATHALI vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/20533/2022HC KeralaKLHC01042292202224 June 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the stay petition. Instead, it disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on the pending stay petition (Ext.P5) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the court ordered that any demand arising from the assessment order (Ext.P3) shall be kept in abeyance until the stay petition is decided. The ratio decidendi is that when a party apprehends coercive action while a statutory remedy like a stay petition is pending, the High Court can issue directions to expedite the decision on such pending applications to prevent undue hardship, without delving into the merits of the underlying dispute.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Varappilykudi Abdulrahiman Shoukathali, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an assessment order for assessment year 2014-15 and a subsequent demand notice dated May 3, 2022. The petitioner had already filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and a petition for stay of proceedings related to the assessment order. The petitioner apprehended coercive recovery proceedings before their stay petition could be considered. The writ petition was filed seeking a direction to expedite the decision on the stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when an appeal and a stay petition are pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that they apprehended coercive proceedings before their stay petition was decided by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and therefore approached the High Court for a direction. The petitioner relied on the principle that a writ petition can be entertained to prevent injustice or undue hardship while statutory remedies are pending. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the respondents. However, the court's disposal suggests that the primary concern was the pending stay petition and the potential for coercive action.

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 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 20533 OF 2022 PETITIONER: VARAPPILYKUDI ABDULRAHIMAN SHOUKATHALI AGED 50 YEARS S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, RESIDING AT VARAPPILLYKUDI HOUSE, KARUKADOM P.O., VENDUVAZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM - 686 691, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADVS. JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, TEMPLE ROAD, THODUPUZHA - 685 584. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL SCHEME, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 4 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 20533 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P3 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2014-15 and Ext.P7 demand notice dated 03.05.2022, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), a copy of which is produced as Ext.P4. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P5. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.

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.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) before whom Exts.P4 & P5 are pending to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till stay petition is decided, any demand pursuant to Ext.P3 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE bng/24.06.2022

WP(C) NO. 20533 OF 2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20533/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPYOF INCOME TAX RETURN ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 25/03/2015. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 17/03/2022 ISSUED U/S. 144. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30/3/2022, COMPUTATION SHEET NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27/04/2022 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 27/04/2022 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 27/04/2022 FOR FILING THE APPEAL. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 03/05/2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →