BRIJESH MUTHALAMKUNNATH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/15476/2017HC KeralaKLHC01063423201709 May 2017Bench: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to take up, consider, and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P3) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court further directed that until such time as orders are passed on the stay petition, the demand notice (Ext.P4) issued by the 1st respondent shall not be enforced. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's submission that he had already filed the necessary appeal and stay petition and sought their disposal. The operative direction was to ensure the expeditious disposal of the appellate and stay applications and to provide interim relief by not enforcing the demand.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Brijesh Muthalamkunnath, proprietor of M/s. Geetham Sweets, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2011-12, dated December 29, 2016, issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Palakkad. The petitioner had filed an appeal and a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on January 27, 2017. The writ petition sought a direction for the consideration of these appeals and stay petitions. A notice dated April 28, 2017, was also issued by the Income Tax Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) and stay petition (Ext.P3) against the assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2011-12? The petitioner contended that he had filed an appeal and a stay petition before the 2nd respondent and sought their expeditious consideration. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in opposition to the direction sought by the petitioner for the disposal of the appeal and stay petition.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MAY 2017/19TH VAISAKHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 15476 of 2017 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BRIJESH MUTHALAMKUNNATH,

PROPRIETOR, M/S. GEETHAM SWEETS,

30/167, CITY POST OFFICE, PALAKKAD-14.

BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I, PALAKKAD-678 014.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR- 680 001.

BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs.

WP(C).No. 15476 of 2017 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 DATED 29/12/2016.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27/01/2017.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27/01/2017.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28/04/2017.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

ANU SIVARAMAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15476 of 2017 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of May, 2017 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P1 assessment order issued by the 1st respondent. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with a stay petition, Ext.P3, before the 2nd respondent against the assessment order. He seeks consideration of Exts.P2 and P3 by the 2nd respondent. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, Ext.P4 demand shall not be enforced. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE smp

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →