DR.V.G. SURESH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/7767/2018HC KeralaKLHC01039357201808 March 20183 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated March 8, 2018, dismissed the writ petition. The Court held that the petitioner had an alternative and efficacious remedy available by way of an appeal before the appellate authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court reasoned that since statutory remedies were available, the High Court should not interfere with the matter under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Therefore, the writ petition was not entertained. No specific issue regarding the merits of the assessment or the tax dispute itself was decided, as the petition was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dr. V.G. Suresh, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The petitioner is seeking relief against the action of the revenue authorities. The procedural history involves the petitioner approaching the High Court directly through a writ petition. The respondents include the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), the Central Board of Direct Taxes, and the Union of India.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to maintain a writ petition against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The petitioner's contention, implied by the filing of the writ petition, is that there are grounds for judicial review of the revenue's action. The revenue's likely contention, as is standard in such cases, would be that the petitioner has alternative remedies available, such as filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and therefore, a writ petition is not maintainable. The specific provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, that would be relevant to the maintainability of the writ petition, such as those pertaining to alternative remedies, are not explicitly named in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 7767 of 2018 PETITIONER(S): DR.V.G. SURESH AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN, NO. 66, ARYA, S.N. PARK, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR 680004 BY ADVS.SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AYAKAR BHAVAN, S.T. NAGAR, THRISSUR 680001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, COCHIN 682011 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) COCHIN 682011 4. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIR PERSON, C-II/49, SATYA MARG, CHANAKYAPURI, NEW DELHI 110021 5. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE/FINANCE, 128 A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001 R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.M.JASMINE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 7767 of 2018 (U) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 27.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 27.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 27.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 27.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ISSUED EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 27.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 ISSUED EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 28.01.2018 ALONG 2011-12 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 28.01.2018 ALONG 2012-13 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 28.01.2018 ALONG 2013-14 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 28.01.2018 ALONG 2014-15 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 28.01.2018 ALONG 2015-16 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 09.02.2018 INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.221 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 26.02.2018 AGAINST ALL THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PENDING BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EB //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P. (C) No. 7767 of 2018 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T The petitioner as against Ext. P1 to P5 assessment orders preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. Petitioner also filed a stay application. 2. There shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay application within 2 months. Till the disposal of the application, the recovery of proceedings pursuant to assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE eb //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →