DR. MATHEW KURUVILA @ THANKU BROTHER vs. TEH DIRECTOR (APPEALS) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-V)

WP(C)/6540/2017HC KeralaKLHC01054487201702 March 2017Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its writ jurisdiction, considered the writ petition. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by either the petitioner or the respondents. Consequently, the court did not delve into the merits of the case or the substantive issues raised by the petitioner concerning the appellate order. The operative direction of the court is not detailed in the provided text, but the nature of the proceeding (Writ Petition (Civil)) suggests a challenge to an administrative or quasi-judicial action. No specific issue was expressly left undecided, as the judgment focuses on the procedural aspect of the writ petition's admission.

What were the facts?

This case involves a writ petition filed by Dr. Mathew Kuruvila, also known as Thanku Brother, against the Director (Appeals) Commissioner of Income Tax and officials from the Directorate of Enforcement. The petitioner is challenging an order passed by the Director (Appeals) of the Commissioner of Income Tax. The specific assessment year(s) and the exact nature of the dispute, including the amount in dispute, are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the writ petition was filed and came up for admission before the High Court of Kerala on March 2, 2017.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner has made out a case for the High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction to interfere with the appellate order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel appeared before the court. No specific arguments for the assessee are recorded in the provided text. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, including the Director (Appeals) Commissioner of Income Tax and officials from the Directorate of Enforcement, were represented by their respective counsel. No specific arguments for the revenue are recorded in the provided text.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2017/11TH PHALGUNA, 1938 WP(C).No. 6540 of 2017 (N) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------- DR. MATHEW KURUVILA @ THANKU BROTHER, H.NO.362, WARD NO.XXVII, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARAPPUZHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR (APPEALS) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-V) MAIN BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR, NO.222, 121 MG ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-34.

THE JOINT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT ACT, GOVT. OF INDIA, 1ST FLOOR, MAINKANDAN BUILDING, ALAPPAT EXTENTION ROAD, RAVIPURAM, COCHIN, PIN-682 106.

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORECEMENT (PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT & FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT ACT) GOVT, OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, COCHIN ZONE, KANOOS CASTLE, MULASSERY CANAL ROAD, COCHIN, PIN-682 001. BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL BY ADV. SMT.C.G.PREETHA, CGC

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.V.

WP(C).No. 6540 of 2017 (N) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.AD(AZ)/01/KCZO/2014/66 DATED 1-1-2014 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 6-2-2014.

P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22-2-2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL ----------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE K.V.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 6540 OF 2017 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 02nd day of March, 2017

JUDGMENT The second respondent initiated proceedings against the petitioner under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, which finally culminated in Ext. P1 adjudication order. Aggrieved, petitioner has submitted Ext. P2 appeal and stay application which are pending consideration before the appellate authority, namely the first respondent. During the pendency of the appeal and stay application, now Ext. P3 proceedings are initiated by the respondents under Section 14 of the FEMA Act, 1999 asking the petitioner to show cause why he shall not be arrested and committed to civil prison in the execution of the said certificate. It is thus challenging Ext. P3, this writ petition is filed. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Central Government Counsel, I am of the considered opinion that first respondent can be directed to take a decision on the stay application submitted by the

W.P.(C). NO. 6540 OF 2017 2 petitioner. Learned Central Government Counsel submits that the appeal is posted on 16.03.2017. 3. Therefore, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the first respondent on 16.03.2017, on which date or any subsequent date, the stay application shall be considered by the first respondent and till such time orders are passed proceedings pursuant to Ext. P3 will stand stayed. The first respondent will also be at liberty to explore the possibility of disposing of the appeal itself after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE DCS

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →