HOLY FAITH BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., EKM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/24183/2015HC KeralaKLHC01070021201510 August 2015Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the second respondent (the appellate authority) to consider the stay petitions (Exts.P5 & P6) after issuing notice to the petitioner. This consideration is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that all coercive proceedings against the petitioner be kept in abeyance until a final decision is taken on the stay petitions. The petitioner was directed to furnish a copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the second respondent for further action. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment orders or the appeals themselves, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of the pending stay petitions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Holy Faith Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging assessment orders for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Kochi (the first respondent). The petitioner had already filed appeals against these assessment orders before the second respondent (presumably the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) and had also filed stay petitions. The writ petition was filed seeking directions regarding the pending appeals and stay petitions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when statutory appeals and stay petitions are pending before the appellate authority, concerning assessment orders for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. Assessee's contention: The petitioner is seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of their pending stay petitions before the appellate authority. The petitioner relies on the general principle that when statutory remedies are available, writ petitions may not be entertained, but in this case, the petitioner is not seeking to bypass the appeal process but rather to ensure timely consideration of their interim relief application. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not record any specific contention in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the merits of the stay petitions. The judgment indicates that the matter was heard, implying the revenue was present and heard.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/19TH SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 24183 of 2015 (W) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ----------------- HOLY FAITH BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., 34/2353, MAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682025.

BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SMT.O.A.NURIYA KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENTS : ---------------------- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), KOCHI AND ANOTHER. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: bp

WP(C).No. 24183 of 2015 (W) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.03.2014 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.03.2014 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE bp

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 24183 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2015 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P1 & P2 assessment orders for the years 2011-12 & 2012-13 passed by the 1st respondent. The petitioner has preferred Exts.P3 & P4 appeals along with Exts.P5 & P6 petitions for stay against the said orders. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exts.P5 & P6 after issuing notice to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till a final decision is taken as directed above, all the coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps. Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE. Pn

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →