K.K.J.FOUNDATIONS vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS III)

WP(C)/4413/2016HC KeralaKLHC01051837201605 February 20164 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated February 5, 2016, dismissed the writ petition. The Court held that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy by way of filing an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Court reasoned that since the statutory remedy of appeal is available, the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. The Court did not decide on the merits of the case but directed the petitioner to pursue the available appellate remedy. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K.K.J. Foundations, represented by its Secretary, Joy Varghese, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an order or action by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) III, Ernakulam, and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kochi. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is not detailed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to maintain a writ petition before this Court challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondents. (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argues that the proceedings initiated by the respondent authorities are without jurisdiction and are therefore liable to be quashed. They contend that the authorities have acted in excess of their powers, leading to a situation where the petitioner has no other efficacious remedy. The petitioner seeks intervention from the High Court to prevent further prejudice. Revenue's contentions: The respondent, represented by Sri. Jose Joseph, S.C., has not recorded arguments in the provided text. Therefore, it is stated that no arguments were made by the revenue.

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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/16TH MAGHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 4413 of 2016 (B) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) : -------------------------- K.K.J.FOUNDATIONS, NAYANA GARDENS, POONKUTTY, ELANJI P.O- 686 665, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JOY VARGHESE, AGED 70 YEARS, SON OF VARKEY. BY ADVS.SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SRI.K.V.GEORGE SRI.P.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR SRI.P.S.GIREESH SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS III), POORNIMA BUILDING, NEAR MANORAME JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 682 034. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI- 682 018. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Msd. WP(C).No. 4413 of 2016 (B) -------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2008 ISSUED IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER UNDER PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AAATK6120D, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER UNDER SECTION 154 OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, DATED 17.04.2009 ISSUED TO PETITIONER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 23.09.2013 ISSUED TO PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 BY 1ST RESPONDENT IN APPEAL NO.ITA2/R-II/E/CIT-II/2009-2010. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.06.2014 PASSED BY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH IN ITA NO.756/COCH/2013. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.09.2015 IN I.T.A.NO.242 OF 2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 05.08.204, FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT, PENDING AS ITA37/R-4/CIT(A)II/14-15. EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 05.08.2014 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.F.NO.AAATK6120D DATED 07.12.2015 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 16.12.2015 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, CA.K.NITHYANANDA KAMATH, F.C.A, CHARTED ACCOUNT BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER FOR STAY DATED 06.01.2016 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF LETTER F.NO.AATK6120D/2006-2007 DATED 15.01.2016 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE. Msd. K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C) No.4413 of 2016 - B ====================== Dated this the 05th day of February, 2016

J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is the assessment order passed against the petitioner for the assessment year 2006-07, under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against which, petitioner filed Ext.P6 appeal, which is accompanied by Ext.P10 stay petition and also Ext.P7 application for condonation of delay, before the 1st respondent. Appeal, stay petition and delay condonation application are pending before the 1st respondent. In the meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed. The petitioner also contends that at present there is no presiding officer in the Tribunal.

2 W.P.(C) No.4413 of 2016 - B

In the above circumstances, it is only proper that, the coercive proceedings be stayed until orders are passed in Exts.P10 and P7, which orders shall determine the matter thereafter.

There shall now be a stay of recovery on condition of the petitioner paying 25% of the amounts, subject however to the consideration of the application of condonation of delay and stay petition; on passing orders in which the matter shall be governed by such orders. Writ petition disposed of.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB/05/02/2016 //// P.A to Judge

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →