ALUKKAS JEWELLERY, vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/4318/2020HC KeralaKLHC01011879202014 February 2020Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the first respondent (Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax) to consider the prayer in the stay application (Ext.P4) within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. Pending the disposal of the stay application, an interim stay was granted on the demand notice (Ext.P3). The Court clarified that this interim stay would only be effective until the stay application is disposed of in accordance with the law.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Alukkas Jewellery, is challenging an assessment order dated December 30, 2019, for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner filed an appeal on January 21, 2020, and simultaneously filed an application for stay. However, a demand notice was issued on February 12, 2020, before the stay application could be considered, creating a predicament for the petitioner. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala by way of a writ petition seeking redressal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when statutory remedies are available, specifically concerning the issuance of a demand notice prior to the disposal of a stay application pending an appeal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that despite filing an appeal and a stay application, a demand notice was issued, leaving them without redressal and facing immediate financial liability. They sought intervention from the High Court to address this procedural issue. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues raised by the petitioner.

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 FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 25TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4318 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER: ALUKKAS JEWELLERY, CITY CENTER, FORT ROAD, KANNUR-670001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER -A.V.FRANCIS BY ADV. SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA RESPONDENTS: 1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CHOVVA.P.O, KANNUR-670006 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), KOZHIKODE .P.O, KOZHIKODE-673001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI JOSWINSON,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.4318 OF 2020 -2-

JUDGMENT The sole grievance of the petitioner in the present case is that against assessment order in Ext.P1 dated 30.12.2019 pertaining to assessment year 2017-18 preferred appeal dated 21.01.2020 Ext.P2. However, in the meantime the demand notice dated 12.02.2020 has been issued thus the predicament of the petitioner is writ large as on same day an application for stay has been filed. But there is no redressal of grievance.

2.

Without expressing anything on the merits of the matter, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the prayer in Ext.P4 application for stay, till the pendency of the appeal within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. However till such time there shall be an interim stay of Ext.P3. WP(C).No.4318 OF 2020 -3-

3.

It is made clear that the stay of Ext.P3 is only till the interim application is disposed of in accordance with law. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. AMIT RAWAL vv JUDGE

WP(C).No.4318 OF 2020 -4-

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT(2017- 2018) EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT (2017-2018) EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →