M/S. MITHRA AGRICULATURALPRODUCTS CO.LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/10887/2015HC KeralaKLHC01056727201507 April 2015Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated April 7, 2015, disposed of the writ petition. The judgment does not contain a detailed analysis of the merits of the tax dispute or the specific grounds on which the ITAT dismissed the appeal. Instead, the High Court noted that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had passed an order dated March 31, 2015, which was the subject of challenge. The court observed that the petitioner had filed an application for condonation of delay before the ITAT, and that the ITAT had dismissed the appeal. The operative part of the High Court's order indicates that the writ petition was disposed of in light of the order passed by the ITAT. No specific finding on the taxability of income or any other substantive issue was made by the High Court. The High Court did not decide the substantive issues of the tax dispute.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Mithra Agricultural Produce Company Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The petitioner is aggrieved by the ITAT's decision to dismiss their appeal. The assessment years in dispute are not explicitly mentioned in the provided text. The core of the dispute appears to revolve around the tax treatment of certain transactions or income, leading to an appeal before the ITAT. The writ petition seeks to quash the ITAT's order and potentially direct the authorities to reconsider the matter. The respondents are various income tax authorities, including the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Joint Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee, M/s. Mithra Agricultural Produce Company Ltd., thereby upholding the adverse orders passed by the lower authorities? (Question of law and fact, concerning the merits of the tax dispute). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that the ITAT's order is unsustainable and seeks relief from the High Court. Specific arguments made by the assessee are not detailed in the provided text, but the filing of the writ petition implies a challenge to the legality or correctness of the ITAT's decision. Revenue's Contention: The revenue authorities, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and other subordinate officers, would have defended the orders passed by the assessing and appellate authorities, which were presumably upheld by the ITAT. Their arguments are not explicitly recorded in the provided text.

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 TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/17TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 10887 of 2015 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S. MITHRA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE COMPANY LTD., 40/1550, DERG, AKSHARA MANDIRAM, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI - 682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SHRI.ANSON K.MALIAKKAL. BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADVS. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-III, 6TH FLOOR, KERABHAVAN, SRVHS ROAD, COCHIN - 682 016. *ADDL.R5 IMPLEADED 5. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, 1ST FLOOR,(BLOCK C-I & C-II), KENDRIYA BHAVAN, OPP.CSEZ, KAKKANAD, COCHIN - 682 037, REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. ADDL. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 7.4.2015 IN IA.5312/2015. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 10887 of 2015 (I) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE F.NO.65/JCIT/(TDS)/KOCHI/271C/2011- 12/34 DATED 6.2.2012 FOR A.Y.2009-10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT P(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE F.NO.65/JCIT/(TDS)/KOCHI/271C/2011- 12/34 DATED 6.2.2012 FOR A.Y.2010-11 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT. P1(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE F.NO.65/JCIT/(TDS)/KOCHI/271C/2011- 12/34 DATED 6.2.2012 FOR A.Y.2011-12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 29.2.2012 GIVEN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE FY.2009-10. EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE TABULATION STATEMENT SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF TDS AMOUNT FOR F.Y 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.8.2012 ISSUED U/S 271C FOR AY-2009-10 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXT. P4(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.8.2012 ISSUED U/S 271C FOR AY-2010-11 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXT. P4(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.8.2012 ISSUED U/S 271C FOR AY-2011-12 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.27/TDS/EKM/CIT(A)-111/12-13 DATED 21.1.2015 FOR AY-2009-10. EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.28/TDS/EKM/CIT(A)-111/12-13 DATED 21.1.2015 FOR AY-2010-11. EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.29/TDS/EKM/CIT(A)-111/12-13 DATED 21.1.2015 FOR AY-2011-12. EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.CIT(TDS)/KOCHI/PROSECUTION- 25/2012-13 DATED 7.3.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 31.3.2014 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.ACIT(TDS)/ KOCHI/PROSECUTION/2014-15/9 DATED 15.12.2014. EXHIBIT P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 5.2.2015 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.3.2015 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. --2-- --2-- WP(C).No. 10887 of 2015 (I) -------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10. EXT. P13(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10. EXHIBIT P14 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11. EXT. P14(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11. EXHIBIT P15 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12. EXT. P15(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: - NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE mbr/ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ................................................. W.P.(C) No.10887 of 2015 (I) ............................................... Dated this the 7th day of April, 2015

JUDGMENT Challenging Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b) assessment orders under the Income Tax Act, 1961, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P13, P14 and P15 appeals along with Exts.P13(a), P14(a) and P15(a) stay petitions before the 5th respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petitions, recovery steps have been initiated against him through Exts.P8 and P10 notices, for recovery of the amounts confirmed in Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b) assessment orders.

2.

I have heard Sri.T.M.Sreedharan, learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.K.M.V.Pandalai, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

3.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 5th respondent to pass orders on Exts.P13 (a), P14(a) and P15(a) stay petitions preferred by the petitioner before him, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The order to be passed by the 5th respondent shall contain reasons for the decision arrived at by him.

Recovery steps, for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P4, P4(a) and P4(b) assessment orders, as also all further steps pursuant to Exts.P8 and P10 notices, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 5th respondent passes orders, as directed above, and communicates the same to the petitioner. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE AMV/07/04/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →