S.MOHANAN NAIR, vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/11995/2022HC KeralaKLHC01024454202204 April 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass orders on the stay petitions (Ext.P3, Ext.P6, and Ext.P9) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Until a decision is taken on these stay petitions, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner are to be kept in abeyance. The court disposed of the writ petition with this direction. No specific findings were made on the merits of the assessment orders or the stay petitions themselves, as the primary focus was on procedural direction. The issue of the validity of the assessment orders was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, S. Mohanan Nair, is aggrieved by assessment orders for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. He filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. Concurrently, he filed stay petitions to halt coercive recovery proceedings arising from the assessment orders. The petitioner apprehends that recovery actions might be initiated before his stay petitions are adjudicated. Consequently, he has filed this writ petition seeking a direction for the timely consideration of his stay petitions and a stay on coercive proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the expeditious consideration of his stay petitions filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of law and procedure) 2. Whether coercive proceedings against the petitioner should be kept in abeyance until the stay petitions are decided? (Question of law and procedure) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that he has filed appeals and stay petitions against the assessment orders and apprehends coercive recovery proceedings before his stay petitions are considered. He seeks a direction for the timely disposal of these petitions and a stay on recovery actions. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the respondents. However, the court considered the submissions of both parties.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C) NO. 11995 OF 2022
T.C. NO. 55/29

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP(C) NO. 11995 OF 2022 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 11995 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: S.MOHANAN NAIR,"MOHANAM", T.C. NO. 55/294, KAIMANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 018. BY ADVS. V.P.NARAYANAN NISHA JOHN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, ANNEXRE, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, DELHI 110 003. 3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, KANOMKULATHY TOWERS, INCOME TAX OFFICE, ERNAKULAM 682 011. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 11995 OF 2022 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11995 of 2022 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2022

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1, Ext.P4 and Ext.P7 orders of assessment relating to assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09, petitioner has preferred Ext.P2, Ext.P5 and Ext.P8 appeals before the 2nd respondent. Petitions for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders have also been filed as Ext.P3, Ext.P6 and Ext.P9. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petitions for stay are 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 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, Ext.P6 and Ext.P9 stay petitions, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/

WP(C) NO. 11995 OF 2022 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11995/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.09.2021 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 29.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 4.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.09.2021 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 29.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 4.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.09.2021 OF THE THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 30.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 4.11.2021 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 09.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →