SHANAVAS @ SHANAVAS SHAMSUDEEN KUNJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/10611/2021HC KeralaKLHC01029066202127 April 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the stay petition (Ext.P6) as expeditiously as possible. Furthermore, the Court ordered that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions. The judgment did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of the stay petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shanavas @ Shanavas Shamsudeen Kunju, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenged an assessment order (Ext.P3). The petitioner had already filed an appeal (Ext.P5) and a stay petition (Ext.P6) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The writ petition sought directions regarding the disposal of the stay petition and a stay on coercive steps. The assessment proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, and the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 Kollam, was the first respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and pass orders on the stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency) The petitioner contended that he had filed an appeal and a stay petition before the second respondent and sought a direction for their speedy disposal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding this issue.

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 TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1943 WP(C).No.10611 OF 2021(B) PETITIONER: SHANAVAS @ SHANAVAS SHAMSUDEEN KUNJU AGED 42 YEARS, S/O SHAMSUDEEN KUNJU, KALLUMPURATHU KIZHAKKATHIL HOUSE, THODIYOOR VENGARA, THODIYOOR P.O, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM-691532. REPRESENTED THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, THAYYIL HOUSE, KANNIMEL, VALLIKUNNAM P.O, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA-690501. BY ADVS. SRI.P.SATHISAN SMT.DONA AUGUSTINE RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 KOLLAM, INCOME TAX OFFICE, AARADHANA NAGAR, KOLLAM, KERALA-691008. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.10611/21 -:2:- JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of April, 2021 Petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 appeal and Ext.P6 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. The proceedings are initiated against

Ext.P3 assessment order. In the aforesaid circumstances, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6 stay petition as expeditiously as possible. Till such time a decision is taken on the stay petition, no coercive steps shall be instated against the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

W.P.(C) No.10611/21 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT 0F INCOME TAX RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 16.01.2020. EXHIBIT P2OF E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15.10.2020. EXHIBIT P2(A)OF E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 17.02.2021. EXHIBIT P3OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.03.2021. EXHIBIT P4OF THE DEMAND NOTICE CORRESPONDING

TO EXT.P3

DATED 20.03.2021. EXHIBIT P5OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO.35 DATED 17.04.2021. EXHIBIT P6OF THE APPLICATION DATED 10.04.2021 FOR GRANT OF STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER

BEFORE

THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH ENDORSEMENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →