K.V.JOSEPH vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/15046/2014HC KeralaKLHC01060668201413 June 2014Bench: 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, CIT(A)) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's stay application (Ext.P4) within one month from the date of the order. Furthermore, the Court ordered that coercive steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P5 be stayed until such orders are passed by the appellate authority. The appellate authority's orders, once passed, would then determine the matter thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K.V. Joseph & Sons, an engineering contractor, is challenging an assessment order for the assessment year 2011-12, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), Circle 2(1), Kochi. The petitioner filed an appeal and a stay petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). While these were pending, the ACIT initiated coercive proceedings for recovery of the demand. The petitioner has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the disposal of their stay application and a stay on coercive steps.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should intervene in the pending appeal and stay petition before the appellate authority by issuing a writ of mandamus to direct the disposal of the stay application and to stay coercive steps? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that coercive steps are being initiated while their appeal and stay petition are pending before the CIT(A). They seek the High Court's intervention to ensure their stay application is considered promptly and to prevent recovery actions until a decision is made. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the issues raised by the petitioner. The revenue was represented by their Standing Counsel.

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 FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/23RD JYAISHTA, 1936 WP(C).NO. 15046 OF 2014 (E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.V.JOSEPH & SONS, ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS, KURIEEKAL BUILDINGS, EDAPPALLY P.O, KOCHI - 682 024, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.J.PAUL, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT KUREEKAL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1) KOCHI, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv.

W.P.(C).NO.15046/2014- E: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.03.14 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.03.14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 26.05.14 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 26.04.14 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.F.NO.CIR2(1)/ARR.DEMAND/2/2014-15 DATED 07.05.14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 03.06.2014 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv.

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 15046 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 13th June, 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Ext.P1 is the assessment order passed against the petitioner for the year 2011-12 against which the petitioner filed Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. Appeal and stay petition are pending before the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, coercive proceedings have been initiated by Ext. P5. 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 consider and dispose of Ext.P4 stay application within a period of one month from today and the coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P5, be stayed

WP(C).15046/14 2 until such orders are passed, which orders shall determine the matter thereafter. Writ petition disposed of. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, Judge Mrcs //True Copy//

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →