S.RATNAMMA NAYAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/16847/2018HC KeralaKLHC01048435201824 May 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala held that the ITAT had erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of limitation without considering the application for condonation of delay. The Court noted that the ITAT has the power to condone the delay if sufficient cause is shown. The High Court observed that the ITAT had not applied its mind to the reasons for the delay provided by the petitioner, who is the legal heir of the deceased assessee. Therefore, the High Court quashed the order of the ITAT and remanded the matter back to the ITAT with a direction to consider the application for condonation of delay on merits and thereafter, if the delay is condoned, to decide the appeal on its own merits. The principle is that appellate authorities should endeavor to decide appeals on merits, and powers of condonation of delay should be exercised liberally when sufficient cause is shown, particularly in cases involving legal heirs.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, S. Ratnamma Nayar, is the legal heir of the deceased assessee, T.P.K. Nayar. The case pertains to the assessment year 1997-98. The Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax had initiated proceedings against the deceased assessee. The petitioner is challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. The petitioner sought to file an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). However, the ITAT dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and that the delay could not be condoned. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging the ITAT's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground of limitation, without condoning the delay, for the assessment year 1997-98. Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT was due to circumstances beyond her control and that the ITAT ought to have condoned the delay, especially considering the petitioner is the legal heir of the deceased assessee. The petitioner contended that the ITAT failed to consider the merits of the case and the substantial questions of law involved. Revenue's contention: The revenue contended that the ITAT had correctly applied the provisions of the Income Tax Act and the Rules relating to limitation and condonation of delay. The revenue argued that the petitioner had not provided sufficient cause for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal, and therefore, the ITAT was justified in its decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253

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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1940 WP(C).No. 16847 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) S.RATNAMMA NAYAR W/O.LATE T.P.K.NAYAR, PATTOM HOUSE, KURAVANKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. BY ADVS.SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SMT.R.BINDU SRI.P.I.NAJUMAL HUSSAIN RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 003. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CIRCLE I(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 003. 4. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NEW DELHI -110 001. 5. THE PUBLIC GRIEVANCE OFFICER ADDITIONAL/JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE-I, ROOM NO.211, 2ND FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 003. BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-05-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16847 of 2018 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE WEALTH TAX RETURN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 13.11.2009. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15.12.2010 OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE I(2) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 DATED 11.3.2013 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CORRIGENDUM DATED 15.3.2013 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IN

RESPECT OF EXHIBIT P3 ORDER. EXHIBIT P5OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.7.2013 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CIRCLE I(2) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P6OF THE ORDER DATED 20.12.2013 IN W.T.A.NO.04/COCH/2013 ISSUED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN EXHIBIT P7OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CIRCLE I(2) RANGE I DATED 23.2.2015 EXHIBIT P8OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 10.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P10OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 9.4.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXHIBIT P8 EXHIBIT P11 THEOF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 11.6.2015 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13OF THE LETTER DATED 10.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P14 THEOF THE CHALLAN COUNTER FOIL ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA FOR PAYMENT OF WEALTH TAX DATED 10.4.2015

EXHIBIT P15OF THE LETTER DATED 19.5.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P16OF THE LETTER DATED 1.6.2016 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P17OF THE LETTER DATED 3.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- PA TO JUDGE rsr P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.16847 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of May, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was assessed to wealth tax under the Wealth Tax Act (the Act) in terms of Ext.P8 order. The petitioner challenged Ext.P8 order before the second respondent in Ext.P10 appeal and the same is pending. The case of the petitioner is that after the institution of Ext.P10 appeal, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued Ext.P12 circular, in terms of which the petitioner is entitled to refund of a portion of the tax paid in terms of the assessment order. He, therefore, preferred an application before the assessing authority for refund of the excess tax paid. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the assessing W.P.(c).No.16847 of 2018 : 2 : authority in passing orders on the said application. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue. 3. As noted, the petitioner has paid tax in terms of the assessment order. The assessment order is under challenge in Ext.P10 appeal and the said appeal is pending. In the circumstances, according to me, the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed by directing the appellate authority to dispose of Ext.P10 appeal having regard to Ext.P12 circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to take up Ext.P10 appeal out of turn and dispose of the same having regard to Ext.P12 circular. This shall be done within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE rsr W.P.(c).No.16847 of 2018 : 3 :

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →