JEWEL HOMES vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/12870/2014HC KeralaKLHC01058493201422 May 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed that the application for stay and the application for waiver of pre-deposit be considered together within one month. Coercive proceedings were ordered to be kept in abeyance until orders are passed on these applications. The further proceedings would be contingent upon the outcome of the waiver and stay petitions. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of allowing the applications to be heard and decided promptly. The operative direction was to defer coercive action pending the decision on the stay and waiver applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Jewel Homes (P) Ltd., is challenging a coercive action initiated based on an Assessment Order dated March 28, 2014, issued under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has filed an appeal against this assessment order and has also submitted applications for waiver of pre-deposit and for a stay of the assessment order. The petitioner sought an interim order to prevent coercive steps until their stay application is considered. The revenue's counsel pointed out that the maintainability of the appeal is a prerequisite for considering a waiver of pre-deposit, as per Section 249(4) of the Act.

What were the issues?

1. Whether coercive steps can be proceeded with based on an assessment order when an appeal and applications for waiver of pre-deposit and stay have been filed? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness and the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that coercive steps should be interdicted until their application for a stay of the assessment order is considered. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the maintainability of the appeal must be considered first, especially when an application for waiver of pre-deposit is made, as the appeal would stand rejected if no waiver is granted, as per Section 249(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 156,Section 271(1)(c),Section 274,Section 249(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2014/1ST JYAISHTA, 1936 WP(C).No. 12870 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- JEWEL HOMES (P) LTD., CASAGRANTE BUILDING, DESABHIMANI JUNCTION, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.P.A.JIHAS. BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR RESPONDENTS : -------------------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, KERA BHAVAN, SRVHS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 011. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2), C R BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-05-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 12870 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS : ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I T ACT, 1961 DATED 28.03.2014. EXHIBIT P1(a). TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 OF IT ACT, 1961 DATED 28.03.2014. EXHIBIT P1(b). TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 R/W SECTION 271(1)(C) OF I T ACT, 1961 DATED 28.03.2014. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 30.04.2014. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 30.04.2014. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT WITH STAY PETITION DATED 16.05.2014. EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT WITH PETITION FOR WAIVER OF PRE-DEPOSIT DATED 16.05.2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ---------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C) No. 12870 of 2014 ====================== Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2014 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved with the coercive steps proceeded with on the basis of Ext.P1 Assessment Order, despite having filed an appeal against the said order. The petitioner has moved Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 Assessment Order and has also filed two applications one for waiver of pre-deposit being Ext.P5 and another for stay of the Assessment Order being Ext.P4. The petitioner prays that the coercive steps may be interdicted till the stay application is considered. 2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for Government of India (Taxes), who submits that in fact when an application for waiver of pre-deposit is made, the issue first to be considered is the maintainability of the appeal, since on no waiver being granted, the appeal would stand automatically rejected as per Section 249 (4) of the Income

W.P.(C) No. 12870 of 2014 2 Tax Act, 1961. 3. In such circumstance, it is directed that, the application for stay as also the application for waiver of pre-deposit be considered together within a period of one month and the coercive proceedings be kept in abeyance till orders are passed. The further proceedings shall depend on the orders passed in the application for waiver of pre-deposit as also the stay petition. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/-

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE.

More judgments on Section 156

All 694 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →