M/S.VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/26083/2020HC KeralaKLHC01064362202026 November 2020Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. The Court held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (the second respondent) must consider and pass reasoned orders on the stay petitions filed by the petitioner (Exts. P4(a) to P6(a)) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after affording the petitioner a hearing. Furthermore, the Court directed that recovery steps pursuant to the revenue recovery notices (Ext. P7 series) for the amounts confirmed by the assessment orders (Exts. P1 to P3) shall be kept in abeyance until such time as the second respondent passes orders on the stay applications and communicates these orders to the petitioner. The petitioner is required to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the second respondent for further action.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Vrindavan Builders Private Limited, is challenging assessment orders (Exts. P1 to P3) issued under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner has filed appeals (Exts. P4 to P6) along with stay petitions (Exts. P4(a) to P6(a)) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The petitioner contends that despite these appeals and stay petitions, the respondents have initiated revenue recovery steps (Ext. P7 series) to collect the amounts confirmed in the assessment orders. This writ petition has been filed seeking intervention from the High Court due to these alleged premature recovery actions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the revenue recovery steps initiated by the respondents are premature and ought to be kept in abeyance pending the disposal of the stay petitions filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that the revenue recovery notices (Ext. P7 series) have been issued and recovery steps are being taken even before the stay petitions filed along with the appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have been considered. This action is prejudicial to the petitioner's right to seek relief from the appellate authority. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue. However, the issuance of recovery notices implies a stance that recovery proceedings are permissible as per the extant assessment orders.

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 THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942 WP(C).No.26083 OF 2020(I) PETITIONER/S: M/S.VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED OPPOSITE NST, WORKSHOP, CIRCULAR ROAD, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND-797 112, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY VARUN RAJ PILLAI. BY ADVS. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SRI.M.H.ASIF ALI SMT.SHAIMA VAHAB 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, POORNIMA, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN-682 036. 3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, CENTRAL, KOCHI-682 018 OTHER PRESENT: SC JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.26083 OF 2020(I) 2

JUDGMENT

Against Exts.P1 to P3 assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts. P4 to P6 appeals together with Exts.P4(a) to P6(a) stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. Ext.P7 series are the revenue recovery notices. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petitions, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P1 to P3 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.P4(a) to P6(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 pursuant to Ext.P7 series of revenue recovery notices for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 to P3 assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent in the stay application and communicate the said orders to the petitioner as directed above and WP(C).No.26083 OF 2020(I) 3 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 SJ

WP(C).No.26083 OF 2020(I) 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 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2012-13 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.3.2020 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2013-14. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.03.2020 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.05.2020 FOR AY-2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2012-13. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.5.2020 FOR AY-2013-14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2013-14. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 25.05.2020 FOR AY-2014-15 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 14.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY-2014-15. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 3/11/2020 FOR AY 2012-13. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 3/11/2020 FOR AY 2014-15

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →