ST. MARYS CHARITABLE TRUST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/15152/2021HC KeralaKLHC01040345202129 July 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The Court acknowledged that stay petitions filed by the petitioner in their statutory appeals against the assessment orders for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 were pending. Consequently, the third respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, was directed to decide these stay petitions within a period of four months from the date of communication of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that until the disposal of the stay petitions, the respondents shall keep the recovery of the amounts assessed as per the assessment orders for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 in abeyance. The petitioner was also directed to cooperate with the third respondent for the expeditious disposal of the stay petitions. No issue was expressly left undecided; the court provided a procedural resolution.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, St. Marys Charitable Trust, is challenging assessment orders for assessment years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. The Trust filed statutory appeals (Ext.P3 and P4) along with stay petitions (Ext.P5 and P6) against these orders. The petitioner's grievance is that despite the pendency of these stay petitions, the respondents (Income Tax Officer and Commissioners) are intending to recover the assessed amounts. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking intervention to prevent recovery while the stay petitions are pending.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery of assessed amounts should be stayed pending the disposal of statutory appeals and stay petitions filed by the assessee? (Question of law and fact, concerning the procedural fairness and the right to appeal). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings are being initiated despite the pendency of statutory appeals and stay petitions, which are crucial for seeking relief against the assessment orders. They sought a direction to prevent recovery until their stay petitions are decided. Revenue's Contention: The respondents opposed the petition, asserting their right to recover the determined amounts. However, they agreed to a direction for the third respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre) to decide the stay petitions within a specified period.

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 A.M.BADAR THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 15152 OF 2021 PETITIONER: ST. MARYS CHARITABLE TRUST 10/223, ST. MARY'S CONVENT, PUTHENCRUZ P.O., PUTHEN CRUZ, ERNAKULAM-682 308, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SR.YOHANNA BY ADVS. V.P.NARAYANAN ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENTS: INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), WARD 1, KOCHI.3RD FLOOR, C.R.BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, 28/243, “POORNIMA”, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682036 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110 001. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 15152 OF 2021 2

JUDGMENT Learned standing counsel takes notice for all the respondents.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that challenging the assessment orders for years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeals at Ext.P3 and P4 accompanied by stay petitions at Ext.P5 and P6. In his submission, despite pendency of the stay petitions, the respondents are intending to effect recovery of the amount assessed under the impugned assessment order.

3.

The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the petition by contending that the amount determined has to be recovered by the respondents. He further submits that the 3rd respondents can be directed to decide the stay petitions within a period of four months.

4.

I have considered the submissions so advanced. Considering the facts and circumstances of the instant case, as stay petitions in the statutory appeals challenging the assessment order are still pending, the petition is disposed of with the following directions. The 3rd respondent is directed to decide the stay petitions at Ext.P5

WP(C) NO. 15152 OF 2021 3 and P6 in pending statutory appeals within a period of four months from the date of communication of this judgment. The petitioner to co-operate with the 3rd respondent in expeditious disposal of the stay petitions. Till disposal of the stay petitions by the 3rd respondents, the respondents shall keep the recovery in respect of the amount assessed as per the assessment orders for the year 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 in abeyance. A.M.BADAR JUDGE N WP(C) NO. 15152 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15152/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.IR(1) 4604/2016 DATED 28/12/2016 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KOLLAM TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 26/05/2020 IN ID NO.14/2018 OF THE LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE 2A(2) PETITION DATED 21.03.2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT 1947 BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. //true copy// PA to Judge

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →