ELITE AGRO SPECIALITIES vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/13907/2020HC KeralaKLHC01035273202010 July 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. Firstly, the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), was directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P3) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Secondly, recovery steps for the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the assessment order (Ext.P1) and rectification order (Ext.P1(a)) were to be kept in abeyance until orders were passed by the 2nd respondent as directed and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner was also directed to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the 2nd respondent for further action. The court did not decide the merits of the assessment or rectification orders.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Elite Agro Specialities, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenged assessment order (Ext.P1) and a rectification order (Ext.P1(a)) passed under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner had already filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The limited prayer in the writ petition was for a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to expeditiously consider and pass orders on the stay petition and to keep recovery steps in abeyance until then. The assessment orders were issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Thrissur, the first respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P3) expeditiously, and to keep recovery steps pursuant to Exts.P1 and P1(a) orders in abeyance until such orders are passed? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their stay petition and a stay of recovery proceedings pending that decision. The petitioner relied on the procedural step of filing an appeal and a stay petition before the appellate authority. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the revenue (respondents).

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 FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2020/19TH ASHADHA, 1942 W.P(C).No.13907 OF 2020(K) PETITIONER: M/S.ELITE AGRO SPECIALITIES SIDCO BUILDING, PERINGANDOOR P.O., ATHANI, THRISSUR – 680 581, REPRESENTED BY P. RAJAN, VICE PRESIDENT – FINANCE. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR – 680 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THRISSUR – 680 001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.13907/2020 :: 2 ::

J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Income Tax Act and Ext.P1(a) rectification order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition expeditiously, and to keep in abeyance the recovery steps pursuant to Exts.P1 and P1(a) orders, till then.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel 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 orders on Ext.P3 stay petition within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P1(a) rectification order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and 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 prp/10/7/2020

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXT.P1(A): COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. EXT.P2: COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →