ROY MARKOSE vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/14812/2022HC KeralaKLHC01029792202229 April 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to pass orders, in accordance with law, on either the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) or the stay application (Ext.P3), whichever is deemed fit, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until such orders are passed, all coercive proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) were to be kept in abeyance. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal or the stay application but ensured that the petitioner's grievance regarding coercive action during the pendency of his applications would be addressed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Roy Markose, aggrieved by an assessment order (Ext.P1), filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay application (Ext.P3) before the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner contended that coercive proceedings were being initiated by the 1st respondent despite the pendency of the appeal and stay application. The petitioner asserted a strong case to challenge the assessment order and sought a direction for the disposal of the appeal and stay application, along with a stay on coercive actions until disposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) and stay application (Ext.P3)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that coercive proceedings were being initiated while his appeal and stay application were pending before the 3rd respondent. He prayed for a direction to consider these applications and to stay coercive proceedings until their disposal, emphasizing the strength of his case against the assessment order. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue.

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 MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 9TH VAISAKHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 14812 OF 2022 PETITIONER: ROY MARKOSE AGED 67 YEARS PALLICKAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHENCHANTHA P.O., VAKATHANAM, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM - 686 538. BY ADV RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD I, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SHASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 14812 OF 2022 2 MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,J - - - - - - - - - - - - WP(C)No. 14812 of 2022 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- Dated this the 29th day of April, 2022

JUDGMENT The petitioner, aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of the assessment has filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay application before the 3rd respondent. The petitioner submits that the 1st respondent is proposes to initiate coercive proceedings notwithstanding the pendency of Exts.P2 and P3 challenging Ext.P1 assessment order. The petitioner submits he has a strong case to put forward to challenge Ext.P1 order. He prays for a direction to consider Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay application and to stay all coercive proceedings till its disposal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and after hearing the learned counsel on either side, I direct the 3rd respondent to pass orders, in accordance with law either on Ext.P2 appeal or Ext.P3 stay application whichever he deems fit within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and till orders as directed above are passed, all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 will be kept in abeyance. Writ petition is disposed as above. MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,JUDGE dlK 29.04.2022

WP(C) NO. 14812 OF 2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14812/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 25/03/2022 COMPLETED U/S. 147 R/W SEC. 144B OF THE ACT ALONG WITH NOTICE OF DEMAND. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPIES OF THE APPEAL, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ONLINE. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION ACCOMPANIED BY THE AFFIDAVIT WHICH WAS FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P2 APPEAL ON 19/04/2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →