SHAJI PULIKALLUMPURAM VARUGHESE, vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/15978/2022HC KeralaKLHC01031997202213 May 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since the petitioner had already invoked the statutory remedy by filing an appeal and stay petitions before the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)), the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the appeal and stay petitions at the earliest. Specifically, the second respondent was directed to take up the stay petitions and dispose of them within a period of three months. An interim stay of coercive recovery proceedings was granted until the disposal of the stay petitions. The court did not decide on the merits of the appeal or the stay petitions themselves, but rather on the procedural aspect of directing the appellate authority to act.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shaji Pulikallumpuram Varughese, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner had preferred an appeal and stay petitions before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi. The writ petition was filed because the petitioner had already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal and stay petitions. The assessment year(s) and the specific order or action under challenge are not explicitly stated in the judgment. The amount in dispute is also not mentioned.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal and stay petitions before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's contention: The petitioner has invoked the statutory remedy by filing an appeal and stay petitions before the second respondent. Therefore, the writ petition is filed seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of these statutory remedies. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue's side regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the merits of the appeal/stay petitions. The revenue's counsel, Sri. Jose Joseph, SC, is noted as appearing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 23RD VAISAKHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 15978 OF 2022 PETITIONER : SHAJI PULIKALLUMPURAM VARUGHESE, MEMANA CHITS AND FINANCIERS MEMANA PLAZA, T.K ROAD, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA - 689 548.

BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS : 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE CENTRAL, KOTTAYAM, KERALA- 686 001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 3 THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICE, KANDANKULATHY TOWERS, KERALA - 682 011. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P(C) No.15978 of 2022 2 T.R.RAVI, J. ------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) No.15978 of 2022 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of May, 2022. J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 series appeal and Ext.P3 series stay petitions before the second respondent. Since the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 series appeal and Ext.P3 series stay petitions at the earliest. The second respondent shall take up Ext.P3 series stay petitions and dispose of the same within a period of three months. There will be an interim stay of coercive proceedings for recovery till then. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- T.R.RAVI, JUDGE amk

W.P(C) No.15978 of 2022 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2014-2015 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2015-2016 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P1(b) TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2016-2017 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P1(c) TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2017-2018 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P1(d) TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2018-2019 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P1(e) TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF PENALTY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2019-2020 DATED 20-03-2022. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2014-2015 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P2(a) TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2015-2016 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P2(b) TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2016-2017 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P2(c) TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2018-2019 DATED 27-04-2022.

W.P(C) No.15978 of 2022 4 Exhibit P2(d) TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2018-2019 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P2(e) TRUE COPY OF STATUTORY APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2019-2020 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2014-2015 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2015-2016 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3(b) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2016-2017 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3(c) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2017-2018 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3(d) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2018-2019 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P3(e) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2019-2020 DATED 27-04-2022. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF DEMAND OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 22-04-2022. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 9-5-2022 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 10-05-2022 SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →