MUHAMMED SHAFI PARAPPURATH PUTHIYAPURAYIL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/27201/2021HC KeralaKLHC01068116202101 December 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while considering the writ petition, directed the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P3) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the assessment order or the grounds of appeal. The primary focus was on ensuring that the stay petition is addressed promptly and that the petitioner is protected from immediate recovery actions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Muhammed Shafi Parappurath Puthiyapurayil, is aggrieved by an assessment order for the assessment year 2018-2019, marked as Ext.P1. He has filed an appeal before the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, as per Ext.P2. Additionally, the petitioner has filed a petition for stay of proceedings under the assessment order, Ext.P3. The petitioner apprehends coercive recovery actions before his stay petition is adjudicated. Consequently, he has filed this writ petition seeking intervention.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the expeditious disposal of his stay petition filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contends that he faces the threat of coercive proceedings for recovery of the demand raised in the assessment order, Ext.P1, even before his stay petition, Ext.P3, is considered by the 3rd respondent. He seeks a direction to ensure that coercive steps are withheld until the stay petition is decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the respondents regarding the stay petition or the threat of coercive proceedings. The respondents' counsel appeared, but their arguments on this specific point are not detailed in the judgment.

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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 27201 OF 2021 PETITIONER : MUHAMMED SHAFI PARAPPURATH PUTHIYAPURAYIL, AGED 48 YEARS, TMC AKBAR TRADERS, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR-670141. BY ADVS. T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) V.P.NARAYANAN ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENTS : 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, KANNUR-673001. 2 THE ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110 001. 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI – 110 001. BY ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 27201 OF 2021 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No.27201 of 2021 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 1st day of December, 2021

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2018-2019, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent, 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 to be effected even 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 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, 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 RKM

WP(C) NO. 27201 OF 2021 3

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27201/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03.09.2021 WITH DEMAND NOTICE. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 09.09.2021. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.10.2021 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 04.10.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →