THE DISTRICT LOTTERY OFFICER vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/9228/2021HC KeralaKLHC01024341202108 April 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), was directed to decide the stay petition (Ext.P7) filed by the petitioner in the statutory appeal (Ext.P5) within two months from the date of communication of the judgment, following due process. The petitioner was directed to cooperate with the second respondent for the expeditious disposal of the stay petition. Crucially, the Court ordered that until the stay petition is decided, the recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P4) shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner was also instructed to furnish a copy of the judgment to the concerned respondent for compliance.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, the District Lottery Officer, challenged orders under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by filing a statutory appeal (Ext.P5) and a stay petition (Ext.P7) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. Despite the pendency of these proceedings, the respondents issued a letter (Ext.P6) intimating the initiation of coercive steps for recovery of the amount due under the assessment order (Ext.P4). The petitioner sought a stay on recovery proceedings until the disposal of their appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously dispose of the stay petition filed by the petitioner, considering the initiation of coercive recovery steps during the pendency of the statutory appeal. Assessee's Contention (Petitioner): The petitioner argued that coercive steps for recovery of the disputed amount were being initiated by the respondents while their statutory appeal and stay petition were pending. They contended that recovery proceedings should be stayed until the appeal and stay petition are decided by the second respondent. Revenue's Contention (Respondents): The respondents submitted that since the stay petition was pending before the second respondent, the writ petition could be disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR THUR AY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943 WP(C).No.9228 OF 2021(C) PETITIONER/S: THE DISTRICT LOTTERY OFFICER C. BLOCK, GROUND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION (P.O), KOZHIKODE 673 020 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) IIIRD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE 673 001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE 673 001 SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.9228 OF 2021 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

Heard both sides.

2.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioner submits that the orders under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act 1961, determining the tax liability are challenged by the petitioner by filing statutory appeal (Ext.P5) accompanied by the Stay petition at Ext.P7. However, during pendency of the appeal as well as stay petition, the respondents have issued a letter at Ext.P6 intimating initiation of coercive steps for recovery of the amount due under the order at Ext.P4. Hence, according to the learned Government Pleader, till disposal of the appeal, the proceedings for recovery of the amount needs to be stayed.

3.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that as the said petition is pending before the 2nd respondent, the petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.

4.

In the light of the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

The 2nd respondent is directed to decide the stay petition at Ext.P7 filed in the statutory appeal at Ext.P5 by the petitioner, after

WP(C).No.9228 OF 2021 3 following the due process of law within a period of two months from the date of communication of this judgment. The petitioner to cooperate with the 2nd respondent in disposal of the stay petition expeditiously. Till disposal of the stay petition at Ext.P7, proceedings for recovery initiated in pursuant to the Ext.P4 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner to furnish copy of this judgment to the concerned respondent for compliance. A.M.BADAR ajt JUDGE

WP(C).No.9228 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ITO(TDS)/CLT/CHND00034G/194B/2017-18 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO EXHIBIT P1 BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.TDS/CLT/LOTTERY/194B/2018-19 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS TDS/CLT/DLO- CLT/201(1) & (IA)/FY 2016-17/2018-19 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2016-2017 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED ON 04.03.2021 FROM INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TDS RANGE, KOZHIKKODE DIRECTING TO PAY THE DISPUTED AMOUNT WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION ALONG WITH A COVERING LETTER

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →