JOY ARAKKATHARA ACHYUTH vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/14688/2023HC KeralaKLHC01031855202328 April 2023Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 1st respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to take up the stay petition (Ext. P3) filed by the petitioner and pass orders thereon expeditiously. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext. P1) shall be deferred until orders are passed on the stay petition. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay petition itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of expeditious consideration and interim relief. The ratio decidendi is that pending a stay petition before the appellate authority, recovery proceedings should be deferred to allow for a decision on the interim relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Joy Arakkathara Achyuth, filed an appeal (Ext. P2) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi (1st respondent) against an assessment order (Ext. P1) passed by the Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi (2nd respondent). Along with the appeal, the petitioner also filed a stay petition (Ext. P3). The petitioner's grievance is that recovery proceedings are being initiated for the amount assessed in Ext. P1, despite the pending appeal and stay petition. The case is before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 1st respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should expeditiously consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext. P3) filed by the petitioner pending the appeal against the assessment order (Ext. P1)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner argues that recovery proceedings are being initiated for the assessed amount while the appeal and stay petition are pending before the 1st respondent, causing prejudice. The petitioner seeks a direction for expeditious disposal of the stay petition. Revenue's contention: No specific contentions are recorded for the revenue in the judgment. The judgment does not mention any arguments presented by the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 8TH VAISAKHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 14688 OF 2023 PETITIONER: JOY ARAKKATHARA ACHYUTH AGED 35 YEARS ARAKKATHARA HOUSE, PALLURUTHY P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682006 BY ADVS. P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SABU PULLAN GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) RESPONDENT: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 GP- SRI.K.M FAIZAL SRI.JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 14688 OF 2023 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext. P1 assessment order issued by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has preferred Ext. P2 appeal before the 1st respondent along with Ext. P3 stay petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending the appeal and the stay petition, recovery proceedings are being initiated for recovering the amount assessed as per Ext. P1. The 1st respondent shall take up Ext. P3 stay petition and pass orders thereon expeditiously. Till then, recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext. P1 shall be deferred. The writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE msp

WP(C) NO. 14688 OF 2023 3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14688/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25-03-2023 Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT (CIT(A) NFAC 2018-2019) DATED 19-04-2023 Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH EXT. P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19-04-2023

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →