KERALA STATE WELFARE CORPORATION FOR FORWARD COMMUNITIES LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/15357/2022HC KeralaKLHC01030809202206 June 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while considering the writ petition, found it appropriate to dispose of the petition with a specific direction. The Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 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. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner, pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1), shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of the stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kerala State Welfare Corporation for Forward Communities Ltd., is aggrieved by an order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18, marked as Ext.P1. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 2nd respondent, as Ext.P2, and a petition for stay of proceedings as Ext.P3. The petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings before their stay petition is considered. Consequently, they have filed this writ petition seeking intervention. The assessment order was passed by the Additional Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi, the 1st respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a stay of coercive proceedings pending the disposal of their appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings before their stay petition (Ext.P3) is considered by the 2nd respondent. They seek a direction to prevent such actions. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the stay petition or the writ petition. The revenue was represented by counsel, but their arguments on the merits of the stay or the writ are not detailed.

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. MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 15357 OF 2022 PETITIONER: 1 KERALA STATE WELFARE CORPORATION FOR FORWARD COMMUNITIES LTD. AGED 54 YEARS L2, KUREENA JAWAHAR NAGAR, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA 695 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, M.G.RANJITHKUMAR BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT: 1 ADDITIONAL JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 100 001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No.15357/2022 2

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2017-18, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent- the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P3. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings 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 2nd respondent-the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 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.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE acd

W.P.(C)No.15357/2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15357/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28.03.2022 ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET AND DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →