ARUN RAJ PILLAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/26275/2020HC KeralaKLHC01065066202027 November 2020Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) was directed to consider and pass reasoned orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P8(a) to P14(a)) within three months of receiving a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Furthermore, recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the assessment orders (Exts.P1 to P7) were to be kept in abeyance until the 2nd respondent passed orders on the stay petitions and communicated them to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the 2nd respondent for further action. No specific finding was made on the merits of the assessment orders themselves, as the focus was on procedural directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Arun Raj Pillai, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging assessment orders (Exts.P1 to P7) passed under the Income Tax Act. He had also filed appeals (Exts.P8 to P14) along with stay petitions (Exts.P8(a) to P14(a)) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - III, the 2nd respondent. The petitioner contended that despite filing these appeals and stay petitions, the respondents were initiating recovery steps for the amounts confirmed in the assessment orders. The petition was heard by the High Court on November 27, 2020.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the recovery steps initiated by the respondents are premature given the pending appeals and stay petitions before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the procedural fairness and the impact of pending appellate remedies). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery steps were being taken even before the stay petitions were considered by the appellate authority, thereby prejudicing his right to seek relief. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue. The learned Government Pleader appeared for the respondents.

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.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942 WP(C).No.26275 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER/S: ARUN RAJ PILLAI,AGED 30 YEARS S/O. M.K.RAJENDRAN PILLAI RAJAVALSAM, PANANGADU, P.O. KULANADA, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 501. BY ADVS. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SRI.T.SAILESH KUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTER CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM-691 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III 28/243, POOMIMA, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN-682 036. 3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER (CENTRAL) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KOCHI-682 018. OTHER PRESENT: SC: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.26275 OF 2020(H) 2

JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1 to P7 assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P8 to P14 appeals together with Exts.P8(a) to P14(a) stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by P1 to P7 assessment orders.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

1.

The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass reasoned orders on Exts.P8(a) to P14(a) stay petitions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 to P7 assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the WP(C).No.26275 OF 2020(H) 3 2nd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner.

3.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE WP(C).No.26275 OF 2020(H) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2012-13 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2013-14 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2015-16 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2016-17 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2018-19 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2012-13. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED WP(C).No.26275 OF 2020(H) 5 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2013-14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2013-14. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2014-15 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2015-16 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2015-16. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2016-17 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12(A) TRUE COY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2016-17. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2017-18 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2017-18. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2018-19 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P14(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2018-19.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →