JOSEPH A. MATTAM vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/8474/2015HC KeralaKLHC01054314201518 March 2015Author: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR5 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated March 18, 2015, disposed of the writ petition. The judgment does not contain any specific findings on the merits of the case or the validity of the tax demand. Instead, the court directed that the writ petition be disposed of in terms of the order passed in a connected writ appeal, W.A. No. 193 of 2015. This implies that the decision in the writ petition was contingent upon or aligned with the outcome of the aforementioned writ appeal. The specific directions or relief granted in the writ appeal, and consequently in this writ petition, are not detailed in the provided excerpt. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Joseph A. Mattam, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT). The petitioner is aggrieved by the demand raised by the Income Tax Department. The writ petition was filed seeking appropriate directions. The respondent authorities are the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Tax Recovery Officer. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly mentioned in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the matter came up for admission before the High Court on March 18, 2015.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India concerning the demand raised by the Income Tax Department. The petitioner's contention, implied by the filing of a writ petition, is that there is a grievance against the tax demand that warrants judicial intervention. The respondent's role is to defend the action taken by the Income Tax Department. The specific grounds for challenging the demand or the arguments presented by either side are not detailed in the provided text. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the petitioner or 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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/27TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 8474 of 2015 (H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOSEPH A. MATTAM, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE M.S.AVARTACHAN, MATTAM HOUSE, CHETTIKULAM P.O., CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-II, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 2. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ WP(C).No. 8474 of 2015 (H) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ P1: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-II, THRISSUR DATED 9/1/15 P2: COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER AS ITA NO.20/TCR/R2IIT(A)-V/13-14 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS P3: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM NUMBERED AS IT APPEAL NO.508C/2014 FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL P4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R2 DATED 19/1/15 P5: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R2 DATED 26/2/15. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................................ W.P.(C).No.8474 of 2015 ......................................................... Dated this the 18th day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Against Ext.P2 first appellate order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. The said appeal is stated to be pending before the said forum. The petitioner is aggrieved by the recovery steps that have been initiated against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P2 first appellate order.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel 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: i. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

ii. If the petitioner pays an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in three equal successive monthly instalments commencing from 30.03.2015, then further proceedings for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P2 first appellate order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the Appellate Tribunal passes orders as directed above and communicates the same to the petitioner. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →