M/S. RAINBOW REALTORS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/2193/2019HC KeralaKLHC01005763201924 January 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider the stay petitions filed by the petitioner at the earliest, preferably within one month. The Court further directed that the respondent authority shall defer any coercive steps against the petitioner until the 2nd respondent has considered the stay petitions. The judgment does not delve into the merits of the appeals or the stay petitions themselves, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of ensuring a timely decision on the stay applications and preventing immediate coercive action.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Rainbow Realtors, an assessee, filed statutory appeals along with stay petitions before the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), for assessment years 2011-2012 to 2016-2017. The petitioner apprehended coercive steps by the respondent authority before the appellate forum could consider its stay applications. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam seeking a direction to the respondents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should intervene in the pending appellate proceedings by directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider the stay petitions expeditiously and to defer coercive steps until such consideration. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that there is an apprehension of coercive steps being taken before the appellate authority has had the opportunity to decide on the stay petitions, necessitating judicial intervention. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the writ petition. The court heard the learned counsel on either side, implying the revenue was represented, but their arguments are not detailed.

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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THURSDAY,THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 4TH MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 2193 of 2019 PETITIONER: M/S. RAINBOW REALTORS RAINBOW SUITES, BELLARD ROAD KANNUR-670001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER ETTOOL KALATHILS ABDULHAMEED BY ADVS. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ SMT.C.T.SUJA RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR-670006 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE - 673001 3 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE - 673001 GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 2193 of 2019 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner, an assessee under the 1st respondent has been facing the proceedings for the assessment years 2011-2012 to 2016- 2017. It filed Exhibits P2 to P2(e) statutory appeals along with the stay petitions. The petitioner apprehends that before the appellate forum could consider its applications, the respondent authority may take coercive steps.

2.

This Court, after hearing the learned counsel on either side, disposes of this writ petition holding that the 2nd respondent will consider the stay petitions, at the earliest and pass orders possibly within one month. The respondent authority shall defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay petitions. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P1 BOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14 EXHIBIT P1 COF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2014-15 EXHIBIT P1 DOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16 EXHIBIT P1 EOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.12.2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-2017 EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P2 BOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2013-14 EXHIBIT P2 COF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2014-15 EXHIBIT P2 DOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2015-16 EXHIBIT P2 EOF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM ALONG WITH THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE AY 2016-17 EXHIBIT P3OF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2011-12 EXHIBIT P3 AOF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P3 BOF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2013-14 EXHIBIT P3 COF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2014-15 EXHIBIT P3 DOF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2015-16 EXHIBIT P3 EOF STAY PETITION SUBMITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2016-17

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →