SANKARAN RANTNAN.C vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

WP(C)/3837/2018HC KeralaKLHC01035427201805 February 2018Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, on February 5, 2018, heard the writ petition (Civil) No. 3837 of 2018. The court, after considering the matter, delivered its order on the same day. However, the provided text does not contain the details of the court's decision, the reasoning behind it, or the operative directions issued. It is not recorded whether the petition was admitted, dismissed, or any other outcome. Therefore, the specific findings on any issues, the ratio decidendi, or the relief granted are not available from this excerpt.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sankaran Ratnan.C, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order or action by the revenue. The respondents are the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is also not elaborated. The amount in dispute, if any, is not mentioned.

What were the issues?

The High Court of Kerala was presented with a writ petition (Civil) No. 3837 of 2018 filed by Sankaran Ratnan.C. The primary issue before the court was to decide on the admission of this writ petition. The petitioner, through his advocates, sought relief from the court. The respondents, represented by a Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, were also before the court. The specific grounds for filing the writ petition or the arguments presented by either the petitioner or the revenue are not recorded in the provided text. The court's task was to determine whether the petition warranted further consideration based on the initial presentation.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 16TH MAGHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 3837 of 2018 PETITIONER: -----------

SANKARAN RATNAN. C,

CHITTEZHATHU HOUSE, UDAYAMPEROOR, THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHI - 682 507.

BY ADVS.DR.K.P.PRADEEP

SRI.SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN

SRI.T.T.BIJU

SRI.K.P.KESAVAN NAIR

SMT.T.THASMI RESPONDENT(S): 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK,

NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

NON CORPORATE WARD -2(3), KOCHI, C.R BUILDINGS, I S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)II, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, POORNIMA BUILDING,

PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI - 682 036.

BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/

WP(C).No. 3837 of 2018 (D) ------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.AJUPR8384B DATED 13-12-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 19-1-2018 FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION IN EXT P2 APPEAL DATED 19-1-2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO AJUPR8384B DATED 13-12-2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE mbr/

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ...................................................... W.P.(C).No.3837 of 2018 ...................................................... Dated this the 5th day of February, 2018 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tact Act 1961 (the Act) on the rolls of the second respondent. The self- assessment made by the petitioner for the year 2015-2016 has been revised in terms of Section 143(3) of the Act as per Ext.P1 order. The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 order in appeal before the third respondent. Ext.P2 is the appeal. Ext.P3 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P2 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the third respondent in passing orders on Ext.P3 application for stay. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the third respondent take a decision on Ext.P3 application for stay, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

W.P.(C).No.3837 of 2018 : 2 : Ordered accordingly. This shall be done within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that until a decision is taken as directed above on Ext.P3 application, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order shall be deferred. Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE hmh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →