JAGANATHAN P vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/32431/2016HC KeralaKLHC01079855201606 October 2016Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE3 pages

AI SummaryThe provided text does not contain the operative part of the judgment, hence the result cannot be determined.

What did the High Court hold?

The provided text is an excerpt from a High Court judgment and does not contain the detailed findings or reasoning of the court on the merits of the case. It only indicates that the writ petition was heard on October 6, 2016, and a decision was delivered on the same day. Therefore, the specific issues decided, the reasoning applied by the court, the ratio decidendi, and any operative directions or relief granted are not available in this excerpt. The judgment does not record any specific findings on the merits of the petitioner's claims or the respondents' defenses.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Jaganthan.P., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging the actions of the Income Tax Department. The respondents include the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and various Income Tax authorities, including the Assistant Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and Tax Recovery Officers. The writ petition was filed seeking appropriate directions against the revenue authorities concerning certain tax proceedings. The specific assessment year(s) and the exact nature of the tax proceedings or the amount in dispute are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the matter came up for admission before the High Court on October 6, 2016.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to any relief against the actions of the Income Tax Department. The writ petition likely sought to challenge the legality or procedural correctness of the actions taken by the revenue authorities. The petitioner, through their counsel, would have argued for the necessity of judicial intervention to protect their rights or to correct any perceived injustice in the tax proceedings. The respondents, representing the Income Tax Department, would have contended that their actions were in accordance with the law and that the writ petition was not maintainable or lacked merit. Specific legal provisions or precedents relied upon by either side are not detailed in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No. 32431 of 2016

ITA NO. 117/COCH/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/14TH ASWINA, 1938 WP(C).No. 32431 of 2016 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- JAGANTHAN.P., TC/49-939, KALIPANKULAM, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 029. BY ADVS.DR.K.P.PRADEEP SRI.SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.T.T.BIJU SMT.T.THASMI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT), DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINSTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ ASSESSING AUTHORITY, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWADIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 003. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWADIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 4. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, (INCOME TAX), GOVERNMETN OF INDIA, 3RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 5. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER (INCOME TAX), CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CR BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI -682 018. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 32431 of 2016 (D) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME WITH COMPUTATION STATEMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 3/5/2008 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED U/S.143(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ATTPP9896A/2007-08 DATED 21/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.ATTPP9896M DATED 21/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.ATTPP9896M/2008-09 DATED 15/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDNET EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL IN ITA NO.130/CENT/TVM/CIT (A)-III/2010-11 ISSUED BY THE CIT (APPEALS)-III, KOCHI EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL DATED 23/3/2016 IN ITA NO. 117/COCH/2016 ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOCHI BENCH EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.TR 24 &25/TRO/TVM/15-16 DATED 5/11/2015 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 24/2/2016 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01607/ATTPP9896M DATED 9/5/2016 EXT.P110(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.01402/ATTPP9896M DATED 24/8/2016 EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 12/5/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXT.P11(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 24/8/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL ------------------------------------------ /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.32431 of 2016 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of October 2016

J U D G M E N T Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to respondents 4 and 5 to pass orders in Exts.P11 and P11(a) requests. According to the petitioner, there is no demand as far as assessment years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 are concerned. In so far as the petitioner had satisfied the demand made in respect of the assessment year 2007-2008, the order of assessment in respect of the assessment year 2008-2009 has already been set aside by the competent authority. Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of as under: The 4th respondent shall consider Exts.P11 and P11(a) and pass appropriate orders within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →