SPECIALITY INDIAN FOOD PARKS AND EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/2377/2022HC KeralaKLHC01005401202224 January 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the submissions of both the petitioner and the respondents, was of the opinion that the writ petition could be disposed of with a direction. The Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), or the competent authority, to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 (the stay petition) within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 (the assessment order) against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Speciality Indian Food Parks & Exports Private Limited, is aggrieved by an order of assessment for the assessment year 2018-19, marked as Ext.P1. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, as per Ext.P2. Additionally, a petition for stay of proceedings related to the assessment order has been filed as Ext.P4. The petitioner apprehends coercive action being taken before their stay petition is considered, leading them to file this writ petition before the High Court of Kerala.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay petition filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? (Question of law and procedure) The petitioner argued that they have filed an appeal against the assessment order and a stay petition, but they apprehend coercive proceedings being initiated before the stay petition is decided. They seek a direction for the timely consideration of their stay petition. The respondents, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not record any specific arguments against the petitioner's plea for expeditious consideration of the stay petition. The judgment does not record any arguments from 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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 4TH MAGHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 2377 OF 2022 PETITIONER: SPECIALITY INDIAN FOOD PARKS & EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED 1 MASS BUILDINGS, VANDANMEDU, IDUKKI DISTRICT, KERALA – 685 551, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.TOMSON CYRIL. BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU ARAVIND SREEKUMAR EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE – NEAC ROOM NO.402, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, NEAR GATE NO. 10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI – 110 003. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE – NEAC ROOM NO.402, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP,NEAR GATE NO-10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI – 110 003. 3 INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 2(1), KOCHI, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI – 682 018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 2377 of 2022 :2: BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 2377 of 2022 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of January, 2022

JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2018-19, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P4. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.

2.

Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.

3.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent or the competent authority to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 :3: assessment order against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE DM :4:

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2377/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.04.2021. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION OF ADMITTING APPEAL DATED 05.08.2021. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 13.01.2022. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →