BENEDICT SIMETHY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/1837/2022HC KeralaKLHC01004249202219 January 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the Income Tax department, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), or the competent authority, to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P8) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also ordered that until the stay petition is disposed of, any coercive action contemplated against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The appeal itself (Ext.P7) was not directly addressed in terms of its disposal timeline, but the disposal of the stay petition was prioritized. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Benedict Simethy, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kochi (2nd respondent), to dispose of an appeal (Ext.P7) and a stay petition (Ext.P8) pending against a regular income tax assessment (Ext.P4). The petitioner is represented by advocates G. Harikumar and Akhil Suresh, and the respondents, including the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), are represented by Sri. Jose Joseph, SC. The matter was heard on January 19, 2022.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the pending appeal and stay petition filed by the petitioner against a regular income tax assessment? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of the pending appeal and stay petition. No specific authorities or precedents were mentioned in the provided text for the assessee's argument. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by Sri. Jose Joseph, SC, appeared before the court. No specific arguments or contentions from the revenue's side were recorded in the judgment text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP(C) NO. 1837 OF 2022 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 29TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 1837 OF 2022 PETITIONER: BENEDICT SIMETHY KADAVILAPARAMBIL HOUSE, SAMBALOOR, PALAYAMPARAMBU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT – 680741 BY ADVS. G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR) AKHIL SURESH RESPONDENTS: 1. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE CIR 2(1) OFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN,SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, THRISSUR – 680001 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) G-51, PARAPILLY LN, MANORAMA JUNCTION GIRI NAGAR, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI – 682036 BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 1837 OF 2022 -2-

JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed by the petitioner basically seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent, i.e., The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kochi, to dispose of Ext.P7 appeal and Ext.P8 stay petition pending against Ext.P4 regular income tax assessment.

2.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Harikumar G Nair and learned standing counsel for the Income Tax department Sri. Jose Joseph, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent or the competent authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P8 stay petition, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, the coercive action if any contemplated, shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE uu/19.01.2022

WP(C) NO. 1837 OF 2022 -3- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 183

7 /2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1OF ITR FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 31.03.2018 FOR AY 2017-18 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 Exhibit P7 Exhibit P8OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) DATED 28.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTOF NOTICE U/S 142(1) DATED 14.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENTOF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2017- 18 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19.12.2019 ALONG WITH THE DEMAND NOTICEOF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION DATED 17.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER'SOF ORDER DATED 12.03.2020 OF 1ST RESPONDENTOF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 23.01.2020 ALONG WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENTOF STAY PETITION DATED 17.01.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXT.P7 APPEAL

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →