SHRI.P.K.JAYAPRAKASAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/8012/2017HC KeralaKLHC01055959201709 March 2017Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the appellate authority (the 2nd respondent, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to dispose of the stay application (Ext.P3) within a period of two months from the date of the judgment. The Court further ordered that coercive proceedings against the petitioner be stayed until such orders are passed by the appellate authority. The order passed by the appellate authority on the stay petition would then determine the matter thereafter. The petitioner was directed to produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri P.K. Jayaprakasan, received an assessment order for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 on December 22, 2016, from the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Guruvayoor. He filed an appeal against this order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on January 19, 2017, along with a stay petition. While the appeal and stay petition were pending, the petitioner alleged that coercive proceedings were threatened. Consequently, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of the stay petition and a stay on coercive actions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should intervene in the pending appellate and stay proceedings before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by issuing a writ of mandamus to direct the disposal of the stay petition and to stay coercive proceedings. The petitioner contended that coercive proceedings were threatened while his appeal and stay petition were pending before the appellate authority. He relied on CBDT Circular F. No. 404/10/2009-ITCC dated 01-12-2009, presumably to support the principle of staying recovery pending appeal. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/18TH PHALGUNA, 1938 WP(C).No. 8012 of 2017 (B) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHRI P.K.JAYAPRAKASAN,

PANAKKAL HOUSE, VALAPPAD BEACH, VALAPPAD, THRISSUR -680 567.

BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADVS. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN, SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GURUVAYOOR- 680 567.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAWAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR- 680 001.

BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs.

WP(C).No. 8012 of 2017 (B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22-12-2016 FOR AY-2014-15 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 19-01-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR YEAR 2014-15.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 22-02-2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 14-02-2017 FILED U/S 220(6) BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR F NO.404/10/2009-ITCC DATED 01-12-2009 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 8012 of 2017 B - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 09th day of March, 2017 J U D G M E N T

Ext.P1 is the assessment order passed against the petitioner for the years 2014-15. Against this order, petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal, which is accompanied by Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. The appeal and the stay petitions are pending before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, it is alleged, coercive proceedings have been threatened. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed. 2. In the above circumstances, it is directed that the appellate authority, the 2nd respondent herein, shall dispose of Ext.P3 stay application within a period of two months from today and the coercive proceedings be stayed

WPC.No. 8012/2017 : 2 : until such orders are passed; which order shall determine the matter thereafter.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition disposed of. Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →