VENAD GRANITES AND SAND PVT LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/4989/2020HC KeralaKLHC01013208202020 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the appellate authority (Commissioner Income Tax Appeals) to decide the appeal and the application for condonation of delay against the assessment order dated December 16, 2019, without insisting on the payment of 20% of the disputed amount. The Court further directed that steps for recovery of amounts pertaining to the demand notice shall be kept in abeyance. The stay of the demand is to remain in effect until the decision on the application for condonation of delay or any interim prayer is made. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of the condonation of delay and the demand for pre-deposit.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Venad Granites and Sand Pvt Limited, is aggrieved by the assessment order dated December 16, 2019, passed under Section 143(3) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Kollam. The petitioner filed an appeal on February 11, 2020, along with a delay condonation application. However, the income tax authorities insisted on the payment of 20% of the disputed amount, citing a Government circular dated July 31, 2017. The petitioner contended that this circular has not been appreciated in previous judgments and sought a writ directing the respondents to decide the appeal and condonation application without insisting on the 20% payment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the income tax authorities can insist on the payment of 20% of the disputed amount for the condonation of delay in filing an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 143(3), in light of the Government circular dated July 31, 2017, and previous judicial pronouncements? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the aforementioned Government circular has not been appreciated by the High Court in several judgments and therefore, the authorities should not insist on the 20% payment. They sought a direction to decide the appeal and condonation of delay application without this insistence. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the insistence on the 20% payment or their stance on the circular.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

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 AMIT RAWAL THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.4989 OF 2020(W) PETITIONER/S: M/S VENAD GRANITES AND SAND PVT LIMITED UP-7/394, VAYAKKAL P.O, AYOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN 691 548 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, PEROORKADA ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA 695 003 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE KOLLAM, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NEAR KARBALA JUNCTION, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM, PIN 691 001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4989 OF 2020(W) 2

JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner in the instant case is that against the assessment order dated 16th December 2019 passed under Section 143(3), Ext.P1, the petitioner has preferred an appeal, Ext.P3 dated 11th February 2020 along with an application for condonation of delay, Ext.P4 and the income tax authorities are insisting for payment of 20% of disputed amount on the basis of the Government circular dated 31st July 2017. The aforementioned circular has not been appreciated by this Court in a catena of the judgments and thus urging this Court for issuance of writ by directing respondents to decide the appeal and application for condonation of delay, including interim prayer without insistence of 20% of the amounts. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and apprised the paper book, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the appellate court to decide the appeal and the application for condonation of delay preferred against the WP(C).No.4989 OF 2020(W) 3 assessment order, Ext.P1 without insisting 20% of the payment in accordance with law. Steps for recovery of amounts pertaining to the demand notice shall be kept in abeyance. The stay of the demand is till the decision on the application for condonation of delay or any interim prayer. The writ petition is disposed of. AMIT RAWAL sab JUDGE

WP(C).No.4989 OF 2020(W) 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. ITBA/ST/S/143(3)/2019-20/1022419749(1) DATED 16/12/2019 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF DEMAND OF ITBA/AST/S/156/2019-20/1022419914(1) DATED 16/12/2019 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER DATED 11/02/2020 ALONG WITH STATEMENTS OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 10?02/2020 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM F. NO. 404/72/93-ITCC DATED 31/07/2017 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY DATED 19/2/2020 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →