JACOB JOSEPH TALIAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/6867/2021HC KeralaKLHC01018253202117 March 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 petitioner was directed to appear before the 3rd respondent, the Appellate Authority, on March 22, 2021, at 11:30 am. The 3rd respondent was directed to consider and hear the applications for condonation of delay (Exts. P5 and P6) and decide them on or before March 26, 2021. The orders on these applications were to be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. The petitioner was also instructed to communicate a copy of the judgment to the 3rd respondent. The parties were to act on the authenticated copy of the judgment. The court did not decide the merits of the delay condonation applications themselves but mandated their timely disposal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Jacob Joseph Taliat, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-IV), to forthwith take up and pass orders on applications for condonation of delay (Exhibits P5 and P6). The petitioner had filed appeals (Exhibits P3 and P4) in 2012, along with these delay condonation applications, seeking to condone delays of four and thirteen days respectively. The petitioner also indicated that he had applied for the Vivad se Vishwas, 2020 amnesty scheme, and orders on the delay condonation applications were necessary to avail its benefits. A communication from the Income Tax Officer (Tech) was produced as Exhibit P7.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent, the Appellate Authority, should be directed to forthwith take up and pass orders on the petitioner's applications for condonation of delay in filing appeals, as required for availing the Vivad se Vishwas, 2020 scheme? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that despite filing appeals in 2012, the applications for condonation of delay were yet to be decided. He emphasized that these orders were crucial for him to seek benefits under the Vivad se Vishwas, 2020 scheme, referencing a communication (Ext. P7) to support this necessity. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents did not oppose the petition on merits but submitted that the petitioner should pursue his applications for condonation of delay, and these could be decided in a time-bound manner.

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 WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942 WP(C).No.6867 OF 2021(G) PETITIONER/S: JACOB JOSEPH TALIAT S/O. GEORGE TALIAT, RESIDING AT 10 A, SKYLINE HOMESTEAD, CHAKOLA COLONY, PERUMANOOR, KOCHI-682 036, PAN-AATPT1788P. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ISAAC THOMAS SRI.P.G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM SHRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHRI.SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-IV), AREECKAL MANSION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 036 4 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018 SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM- STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.6867 OF 2021 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 17th day of March 2021 The petitioner in this writ petition is praying for directing the 3rd respondent or any other officer currently seized of Exhibits P5 and P6 applications for condonation of delay to forthwith take up and pass orders on the same. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had preferred appeal (Exts.P3 and P4) along with applications for condonation of delay (Exts.P5 and P6), seeking condonation of delay of four days and thirteen days respectively. Despite filing of the appeal in the year 2012, the applications for condonation of delay in preferring appeals are yet to be decided. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drew my attention to the communication at Ext.P7 and submitted that the petitioner had applied for amnesty scheme Vivad se Vishwas, 2020 and for seeking benefit of that scheme, orders on applications for condonation of delay are necessary. For that purpose, the communication at Ext.P7 is issued by the Income Tax Officer (Tech) which is at Ext.P7. WP(C).No.6867 OF 2021 3 4. Learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner may pursue his applications for condonation of delay and those can be decided in time bound manner. 5. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- The petitioner is directed to appear before the 3rd respondent, Appellate Authority at 11.30 am on 22.03.2021. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider and hear the applications for condonation of delay (Exts.P5 and P6) and then to decide those applications on or before 26.03.2021 and communicate the orders on those applications for condonation of delay to the petitioner forthwith. Petitioner to communicate copy of this judgment to the 3rd respondent for necessary action. Parties to

act on the authenticated copy of this judgment.

The petition is accordingly disposed of. A.M.BADAR ajt JUDGE

WP(C).No.6867 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 16.11.2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN ITA NOS. 1037 AND 1197 OF 2009 EXHIBIT P2OF THE ORDER DATED 28.12.2011 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93. EXHIBIT P4OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96. EXHIBIT P5OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93 DATED 13.02.2012 EXHIBIT P6OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 DATED 22.02.2012. EXHIBIT P7OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22.02.2021 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8OF THE LETTER DATED 25.02.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9OF THE SYSTEM GENERATED EMAIL DATED 10.03.2021 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →