SMART RESIDENCY HOTELS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/25118/2021HC KeralaKLHC01063235202112 November 2021Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, to consider and pass orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) 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 pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until a decision is taken on the stay petition. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal or the assessment order itself, but rather focused on the procedural aspect of ensuring the petitioner's right to have their stay application considered without prejudice.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Smart Residency Hotels India Private Ltd., is aggrieved by an order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18, marked as Ext.P1. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, as per Ext.P2. Concurrently, a petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order was filed as Ext.P3. The petitioner apprehends coercive recovery actions before their stay petition is considered. Consequently, the petitioner has filed this writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking appropriate directions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a stay of coercive proceedings pending the disposal of their appeal and stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that coercive proceedings are likely to be initiated before their stay petition is considered by the appellate authority, causing irreparable hardship. They seek a direction to keep such proceedings in abeyance until the stay petition is decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the writ petition. The court proceeded to pass an order based on the submissions of the petitioner and the respondents generally.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 25118 OF 2021 PETITIONER: SMART RESIDENCY HOTELS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. XIII-325A, MARATHAKKARA, BYE PASS ROAD, OLLUR (P.O),THRISSUR - 680306, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SHRI ARUN RAJ PILLAI. BY ADVS. S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF M.H.ASIF ALI DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTER CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM - 691001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, 28/243, "POORNIMA', PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN - 682036. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 25118 OF 2021 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J --------------------------- WP(C) NO. 25118 OF 2021 --------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2021 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to assessment year 2017-18, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the second respondent, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. Petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has also been filed as Ext.P3. Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition. 2. Having considered the submissions of the Counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction. 3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition, within period of three months from the date of

WP(C) NO. 25118 OF 2021 3 receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such decision is taken, all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJ/12.11.2021

WP(C) NO. 25118 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25118/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.09.2021 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY 2017-18 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 20.10.2021 FOR AY 2017-18 E-FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 22.10.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR AY 2017- 18.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →