K.K.MOHANDAS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/30158/2018HC KeralaKLHC01068198201821 November 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, while disinclined to fix a specific time frame for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider the application, held that it would serve the interest of justice if the authority considered the petitioner's stay petition expeditiously. The court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay petition itself but directed the appellate authority to consider the stay application with urgency. The operative direction was for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider the stay petition expeditiously. No issues were expressly left undecided, as the focus was procedural.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K.K. Mohandas, an assessee, had filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against assessment orders for the assessment years 2007-2008 to 2013-2014. These appeals had been pending since 2015. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking an early disposal of these appeals. However, during the hearing, the petitioner's counsel confined the relief sought to the appellate authority's disposal of an interim stay petition that had been recently filed. The petitioner sought this to prevent departmental coercive steps.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the petitioner's interim stay petition expeditiously, considering the appeal has been pending since 2015. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought an early disposal of the interim stay petition filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to ward off departmental coercive steps. The petitioner's counsel confined the relief to this specific request. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the disposal of the stay petition. The court's direction was made in the interest of justice.

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 WEDNESDAY,THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1940 WP(C).No. 30158 of 2018 PETITIONER: K.K.MOHANDAS, AGED 62 YEARS KOLANTHARA HOUSE, MELMURINGODI PERAVOOR, KANNUR-670 673 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS: 1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, AYAKAR BHAVAN( NORTH BLOCK), KOZHIKODE, PIN- 673 001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) COCHIN 682 036 3 TAX RECOVERY OFFICER(CENTRAL) KOCHI, 5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G ROAD, COCHIN 682 011 4 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 AAYAKARBHAVAN(NORTH BLOCK) KOZHIKODE 673 001 SRI JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30158 of 2018 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner, an assessee, assailed Exts.P1 to P7 assessment orders before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the 2nd respondent. Those assessment orders belong to 2007-2008 to 2013-2014. Seeking their early disposal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

Now the petitioner's counsel, however, confines the relief to the appellate authority's disposing of the interim stay petition.

3.

Granted, the petitioner very recently filed a stay petition in an appeal pending since 2015. The petitioner, nevertheless, wants to press the stay petition before the authority to ward off departmental coercive steps.

4.

Though this Court is disinclined to fix a time frame on the 2nd respondent's considering the application, it however serves the interest of justice if the authority could consider the petitioner's stay petition, expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2007-08,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P2OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2008-09,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P3OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2009-10,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P4OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2010-11,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P5OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2011-12,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P6OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P7OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2013-14,UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT EXHIBIT P8OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P9OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P10OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P3 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P11OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P4 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P12OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P5 ASSESSMENT ORDER EXHIBIT P13OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P16 ASSESSMENT EXHIBIT P14OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST EXT P7 ASSESSMENT EXHIBIT P15OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 8-8- 2018 FOR THE YEAR 2007-08 EXHIBIT P16OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9-8- 2018 FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P17OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9- 08-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P18OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9- 08-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 EXHIBIT P19OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9- 08-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 EXHIBIT P20OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9- 08-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P21OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 9- 08-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXHIBIT P22OF THE REPLY DATED 15-08-2018 TO EXT P23 DEMAND NOTICE EXHIBIT P23OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 28/08/2018 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL //// P.A. TO JUDGE

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →