E.C PETROLEUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court directed the third respondent (NFAC) to consider and dispose of the stay petition (Ext.P4) and the delay petition filed in Ext.P3 appeal, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The NFAC was also directed to afford the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. The Court further stipulated that if the delay is condoned and the stay petition is considered, and a conditional order of stay is passed, reasons must be provided. Until orders are passed on the delay and stay petitions, all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) and demand notice (Ext.P2) were deferred. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, E.C Petroleum, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the third respondent, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), to expeditiously consider and dispose of its appeal (Ext.P3) and stay petition (Ext.P4). The petitioner was aggrieved by an assessment order (Ext.P1) and had filed the appeal on 20.04.2023, along with a delay petition. Subsequently, a demand notice (Ext.P2) was issued by the Income Tax Officer. The petitioner then filed a stay petition (Ext.P4) before the NFAC on 09.08.2023, praying for immediate consideration. The Income Tax Officer and the National Faceless Assessment Centre were also listed as respondents.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should direct the third respondent (NFAC) to expeditiously consider and dispose of the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P4) and the delay petition filed along with the appeal (Ext.P3)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the NFAC should be directed to consider and dispose of the stay petition immediately, given the pending appeal and delay petition. The petitioner sought urgent relief from further proceedings based on the assessment order and demand notice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, submitted that along with the appeal, the petitioner had also filed a petition to condone the delay. No other specific arguments were recorded for the revenue regarding the disposal of the stay or delay petitions.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 27334 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1 E.C PETROLEUM VADUVANCHAL THOMMATUCHAL, VADUVANCHAL P O , WAYNAD 673572, KERALA, INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR.SHAMEER ELAVANCHALIL, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O HAJI ABDU RAHIMAN KUTTY, RESIDING AT NARUKKIL HOUSE, VAVAD (POST), KODUVALLY, PIN - 673572 BY ADVS. M.P.SHAMEEM AHAMED AKHIL PHILIP MANITHOTTIYIL RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, J3PR+225, KAINATTY, KALPETTA, WAYANNAD DISTRICT KERALA 673121, PIN - 673121 2 THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA, NEW DELHI, 110001 (REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER), PIN - 110001 3 THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE C-BLOCK, 4TH FLOOR, S.P. M. CIVIC CENTER, NEW DELHI (REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER), PIN - 110001 SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC No.27334 of 2023 2 C. S. DIAS, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.27334 of 2023 ------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August, 2023 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the third respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition, expeditiously. 2. The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the third respondent on 20.04.2023 along with a delay petition. Subsequently, the second respondent has issued Ext.P2 demand notice. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 stay petition before the third respondent on 09.08.2023. The petitioner prays that the third respondent may be directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 stay petition immediately. Hence, the writ petition.
WPC No.27334 of 2023 3 3. Heard; Sri.M.P.Shameem Ahamed, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. Sri.Christopher Abraham, on instructions, submitted that along with the appeal, the petitioner has also filed a petition to condone the delay. 5. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that a delay petition is also pending consideration with Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition, I deem it appropriate to direct the third respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 stay petition and delay petition immediately. Resultantly, I order the writ petition as follows: (i) The third respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 stay petition and
WPC No.27334 of 2023 4 the delay petition filed in Ext.P3 appeal, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. (ii) Needless to mention that, if the third respondent condones the delay and then considers the stay petition, and then passes a conditional order of stay, he shall state reasons for the same. (iii) Until such time orders are passed in the delay petition and on the stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 shall stand deferred. Sd/- C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/17-08
WPC No.27334 of 2023 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27334/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.03.2023 PASSED U/S 147 R/W 144 & 144B IN THE NAME OF 'E C PETROLEUM' WITH PAN AAGFE1432L EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 17.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM 35 ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 9.08.2023 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE E- ACKNOWLEDGMENT RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Beiersdorf Ag & Anr. vs. Duvac Cosmedics & Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Namastu Enterprise Private Limited vs. Kajalben Maheshbhai Kaklotar (Proprietor Of Khodal Enterprise) And AnrDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Haveli Restaurant And Resorts LTD vs. Shubham Food EnterprisesDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Zydus Wellness Products LTD vs. Tushar Chimanlal Chitalia & Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Jsw Mg Motor INDIA Private Limited & Anr. vs. Tristar Auto Agencies (Vizag) Private LimitedDelhi · 3 Nov 2026