THE DISTRICT LOTTERY OFFICER vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)

WP(C)/9775/2021HC KeralaKLHC01027004202123 April 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN5 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the stay petition (Ext.P6) as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that until final orders are passed on the stay petition, the respondents shall not take any coercive action pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspects of the stay petition and the interim relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, the District Lottery Officer, Ernakulam, is responsible for lottery ticket distribution and prize disbursement up to Rs. 1 lakh. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order imposing penalty (Ext.P2) and a subsequent demand notice (Ext.P4). Consequently, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P6) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 2nd respondent. While the appeal and stay petition were pending, coercive steps were initiated by the respondents. This led the petitioner to file a writ petition seeking directions for the disposal of the appeal and stay petition, and a stay on coercive actions until the disposal of the stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and dispose of the statutory appeal and stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether coercive action pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4 should be stayed until the disposal of the appeal and stay petition? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's arguments (Petitioner): The petitioner, through the Government Pleader, argued that they are aggrieved by the penalty order and demand notice and have filed an appeal and stay petition. They sought directions for the expeditious disposal of these and a stay on coercive steps. The petitioner relied on the fact that an appeal and stay petition were duly filed. Revenue's arguments (Respondents): The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents appeared. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by 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 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 3RD VAISAKHA, 1943 WP(C).No.9775 OF 2021(V) PETITIONER/S: THE DISTRICT LOTTERY OFFICER, DISTRICT LOTTERY OFFICE, 7TH FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM - 682 011. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.VINEETHA B. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) TAX BUILDING, I. S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018, ERNAKULAM. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TAX BUILDING, I. S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018, ERNAKULAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.9775 OF 2021(V) -2- Dated this the 23rd day of April 2021

J U D G M E N T This Writ Petition is filed for issuing appropriate directions to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the Statutory Appeal and Stay Petition filed by the petitioner as evident by Exts.P3 and P6 and further to stay any coercive action pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4 till disposal of the Appeal and Stay Petition.

The petitioner is an officer responsible for the distribution of lottery tickets to registered agents and also for disbursement of prizes up to Rs.1 lakh arising out of the conduct of lotteries in Ernakulam District. He is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order imposing penalty and issuance of subsequent demand notice. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 Appeal. Ext.P6 Stay

WP(C).No.9775 OF 2021(V) -3- Petition is also filed. Meanwhile, coercive steps are taken by the respondents. Hence this Writ Petition.

Heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

After hearing both sides, I think this Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 Stay Petition within a time frame and there can be a direction to the respondents not to initiate any coercive steps till the disposal of the same. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in Ext.P6 Stay Petition as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till final orders are passed in Ext.P6, the WP(C).No.9775 OF 2021(V) -4- respondents shall not take any coercive action pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4. STK/RR P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE

WP(C).No.9775 OF 2021(V) -5-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE F.NO.ACIT(TDS)/KOCHI/DIST. LOTTERY/2016-17/CHND00204B. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IMPOSING PENALTY. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER INTIMATING COERCIVE STEPS. EXHIBIT P5 REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO EXHIBIT P4. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION ALONG WITH A COVERING LETTER. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FORWARDED TO COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS).

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →