SHRI GEORGE MERLO PALLATH, vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/35373/2018HC KeralaKLHC01081280201830 October 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition without adverting to the merits of the case. The Court directed that the respondent (Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax) would consider the petitioner's Ext.P2 application expeditiously within two months. The Court also ordered that until the application is considered, the authorities would defer all coercive steps against the petitioner. The principle established is that in cases of administrative delay in disposing of statutory applications, the High Court may intervene to direct expeditious disposal, while also providing interim protection against coercive action. No specific issue was left undecided, as the Court focused on the procedural aspect of the pending application.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri George Merlo Pallath, an income tax assessee, filed an application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is marked as Ext.P2. The petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala by filing this writ petition (civil) because his Ext.P2 application had not been disposed of. The assessment year(s) are not specified. The respondent is the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Range-1, Ernakulam. The order or action under challenge is the non-disposal of the Section 154 application. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history is that the petitioner filed the application, and upon its non-disposal, filed the present writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition for the non-disposal of an application filed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the statutory remedy of appeal or revision is available. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel argued that the writ petition was filed due to the non-disposal of the Section 154 application. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the revenue informed the Court that the respondent would consider the petitioner's Ext.P2 application within two months.

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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY ,THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1940 WP(C).No. 35373 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: SHRI GEORGE MERLO PALLATH, AGED 57 YEARS PALLATH HOUSE, ALAPPAT CROSS ROAD, RAVIPURAM, ERNAKULAM - 682 016. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SMT. ARYA ANIL SMT. NILOOFAR O. NIZAM SRI.SREEJITH R.NAIR RESPONDENT/S: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, RANGE-1, ERNAKULAM - 682 018. SC SRI. K.M.V. PANDALAI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 35373 of 2018 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner, an income tax assessee, filed the Ext.P2 application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. Complaining that it has so far not been disposed of, he has filed this writ petition.

2.

In response to the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, the learned Standing Counsel informs the Court that the respondent will consider the petitioner's Ext.P2 application in two months.

3.

Therefore, without adverting the merits, I dispose of the writ petition, holding that the respondent will consider the petitioner's Ext.P2 application, expeditiously in two months. Till then the authorities will defer all coercive steps. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE hmh

WP(C).No. 35373 of 2018 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE RETURNS ALONG WITH COMPUTATION OF THE INCOME AND FORM NO.16A ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND HIS MINOR SON. EXHIBIT P2OF THE LETTER DATED 8.4.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 12.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2) KOCHI. EXHIBIT P4OF LETTER DATED 20.11.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), KOCHI. EXHIBIT P5 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITOF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 18.9.2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. NIL //// PA to Judge

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →