MALLELIL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/664/2022HC KeralaKLHC01001678202210 January 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while considering the writ petition, acknowledged the petitioner's apprehension of coercive proceedings. The Court found it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a specific direction. The Tribunal directed the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P4) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. No specific finding was made on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, as the writ petition was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mallelil Industries Private Limited, is aggrieved by an assessment order for the assessment year 2018-19. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, and a stay petition (Ext.P4) has also been filed. The petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings before the stay petition is considered. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents. The assessment order is Ext.P1, the appeal is Ext.P2, and the stay petition is Ext.P4.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the consideration of their stay petition before coercive proceedings are initiated, given the pendency of their appeal against the assessment order for assessment year 2018-19. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that they are facing potential coercive recovery proceedings before their stay petition, filed along with their appeal, is considered by the appellate authority. They seek a direction to prevent such actions until a decision on the stay petition is made. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the petitioner's prayer. The court considered submissions from both sides.

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 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 20TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 664 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: MALLELIL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED MALLELIL HOUSE, ATTACHAKKAL P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA - 689 691, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SREEDHARAN NAIR RAGHAVAN PILLAI. BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU ARAVIND SREEKUMAR EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, TK ROAD, THIRUVALLA, KERALA - 689 109. 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE - NEAC, ROOM NO.402, 2D FLOOR, E-RAMP, NEAR GATE NO.10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI - 110003. 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE - NEAC, ROOM NO.402, 2D FLOOR, E-RAMP, NEAR GATE NO.10, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI - 110003. OTHER PRESENT: SC. JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.664/2022 ..2.. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- WP.(C) No. 664 of 2022 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th 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 3rd 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.

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 ..3.. direction.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE bka/- ..4..

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 664/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DATED 30.03.2021 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 26.08.2021 OF FILING OF THE APPEAL. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 10.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DATED 31.07.2017. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DATED 29.02.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →