BRIJESH M. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/29313/2019HC KeralaKLHC01076040201901 November 2019Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with specific directions. Firstly, the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) was directed to consider and pass reasoned orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P3 and P3(a)) within two months of receiving a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Secondly, recovery steps for the amounts confirmed by the Section 154 orders (Exts.P1 and P1(a)) were to be kept in abeyance until the second respondent passed orders on the stay petitions and communicated them to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to furnish copies of the writ petition and the judgment to the second respondent. The court did not decide the merits of the appeals or the validity of the Section 154 orders.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Brijesh M., proprietor of M/s Geetham Sweets, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The challenge was against orders passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Exts.P1 and P1(a)). The petitioner had filed appeals along with stay petitions (Exts.P2, P2(a), P3, and P3(a)) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the second respondent. The petitioner contended that recovery steps were being initiated by the respondents even before the stay petitions were considered. The writ petition sought directions regarding the consideration of these stay petitions and the recovery proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Officer (first respondent) can initiate recovery steps for amounts confirmed by Section 154 orders (Exts.P1 and P1(a)) while appeals and stay petitions are pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (second respondent)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery steps were being taken prematurely, prior to the adjudication of their stay petitions by the appellate authority. The petitioner sought a direction to halt these recovery actions until the stay petitions were decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue's side. However, the fact that recovery steps were being taken suggests an assertion of the revenue's right to recover the confirmed demand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.29313 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER: BRIJESH M. AGED 44 YEARS PROPRIETOR, M/S GEETHAM SWEETS, 30/167, CITY POST OFFICE, PALAKKAD - 14. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - I, PALAKKAD - 678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR - 680 001. OTHER PRESENT: SC, JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.29313 OF 2019 2

JUDGMENT Against Exts.P1 and p1(a) orders under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P2 and P2(a) appeals together with Exts.P3 and P3(a) stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P1 and p1(a) orders .

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

1.

The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass reasoned orders on Exts.P3 and P3(a) stay petitions within a period of two month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and p1(a) orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner.

WP(C).No.29313 OF 2019 3

3.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE SJ

WP(C).No.29313 OF 2019 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXHIBIT P1 (a) COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2013-14 EXHIBIT P2 (a) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2014-15 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 (a) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →