KELATH PARAMBIL UMMER MUHAMMED SHAREEF vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/40618/2022HC KeralaKLHC01088129202216 December 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the National Faceless Appeal Centre to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's application for stay (Ext.P3) as expeditiously as possible. Crucially, the Court mandated that the petitioner be afforded an opportunity of being heard before any decision on the stay petition. Furthermore, the Court ordered that until such time as orders are passed on the stay petition, any proceedings for the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the stay petition itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of ensuring the stay petition is heard promptly and recovery is halted in the interim.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kelath Parambil Ummer Muhammed Shareef, is challenging an order of assessment for the assessment year 2020-2021, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. Aggrieved by this assessment order (Ext.P1), the petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P2) along with a stay petition before the National Faceless Appeals Centre. The petitioner's primary concern is that recovery proceedings might be initiated to collect the amounts due under the assessment order while the stay petition is still pending. Therefore, the petitioner sought a direction from the High Court to keep recovery steps in abeyance until the stay petition is considered.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should issue a direction to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance pending consideration of a stay petition by the National Faceless Appeals Centre? (Question of procedure and administrative relief, turning on principles of natural justice and expeditious disposal of quasi-judicial matters). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery steps might be taken before the National Faceless Appeals Centre decides on the stay petition, causing prejudice. Therefore, a direction was sought to keep recovery in abeyance. Revenue's Contention: The Standing Counsel for the revenue was heard. No specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the revenue's stance on the stay or the High Court's intervention.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 40618 OF 2022 PETITIONER: KELATH PARAMBIL UMMER MUHAMMED SHAREEF AGED 36 YEARS KELATH PARAMBIL HOUSE, KARAKKAD, KONDURKARA PO OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD, KERALA, PIN - 693303 BY ADVS. V.P.NARAYANAN ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE, SHAKTHANTHAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM DELHI, PIN - 110003 OTHER PRESENT: ADV. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P. (C) No. 40618 of 2022 ..2.. JUDGMENT Dated this the 16th day of December, 2022 The petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment for the assessment year 2020-2021 under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Being aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P2 stay petition before the National Faceless Appeals Centre. The petitioner apprehends that pending consideration of the stay petition by the National Faceless Appeals Centre, steps may be taken to recover amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment. He, therefore, prays that a direction may be issued pending consideration of the stay petition, any steps to recover amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be kept in abeyance. 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel also. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the limited nature of the relief

W.P. (C) No. 40618 of 2022 ..3.. sought for by the petitioner, this Writ Petition will stand disposed of directing the National Faceless Appeal Centre to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 application for stay filed in Ext.P2 appeal, as expeditiously as possible, after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Till such time as orders are passed on Ext.P3 stay petition, any proceeding for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE RMV

W.P. (C) No. 40618 of 2022 ..4.. APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40618/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-902022 FOR AY 2020-21 Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 27-10-2022 FOR AY-2020-21 Exhibit3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26-10-2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →