ROADS & BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/21090/2014HC KeralaKLHC01066711201401 September 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to dispose of the pending appeal (Ext.P3) within a period of one month from the date of the order. Furthermore, the Court ordered that coercive proceedings pursuant to the demand notice (Ext.P4) shall be kept in abeyance in the interim. The final decision on the matter will be determined by the orders passed on Ext.P3. The Court did not decide on the merits of the penalty order or the appeal itself but focused on procedural directions to ensure timely resolution and prevent immediate recovery actions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Roads & Bridges Development Corporation of Kerala Ltd. (RBDCK), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenged a penalty order (Ext.P2) passed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) under Section 221 of the Income Tax Act. RBDCK had filed an appeal (Ext.P3) against this penalty order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was pending. In the interim, a demand notice (Ext.P4) was issued. The writ petition was filed in this context, seeking relief concerning the pending appeal and the demand notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), should be directed to dispose of the pending appeal (Ext.P3) filed by the petitioner against the penalty order (Ext.P2). 2. Whether coercive proceedings pursuant to the demand notice (Ext.P4) should be kept in abeyance until the appeal is decided. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that its appeal against the penalty order was pending and that a demand notice had been issued in the interim. The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of its appeal and a stay on coercive recovery actions. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue's side. However, the revenue is represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 221,Section 246A(1)(m)

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 MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/10TH BHADRA, 1936 WP(C).No. 21090 of 2014 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------------------ ROADS & BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD. REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR PREETHI BUILDING, M.V.ROAD, PALARIVATTOM ERNAKULAM-682025. BY ADV. SRI.M.VIJAYA KUMAR, SC, RBDCK RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. 2. JOINT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) KOCHI-682018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 21090 of 2014 (I) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-4-2008. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12-2-2009. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) COCHIN U/S. 246 A(1)(M) DATED 16-3-2009. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. F.NO.ACIT-TDS/CHN/2011- 12/221 DATED 2-11-2011. //True Copy// P.A. To Judge

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 21090 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 1st September, 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Ext.P2 is the penalty order passed by the 2nd respondent under Section 221 of the Income Tax Act, against which the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 appeal, which is stated to be pending before the 3rd respondent. In the meanwhile, Ext.P4 demand notice has been issued. It is in this context, the writ petition has been filed. 2. In the above circumstances, it is deemed fit that 3rd respondent be directed to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal within a period of one month from today. It is also directed that in the meanwhile, coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance and the orders passed on Ext.P3 shall determine the matter, thereafter. Writ petition disposed of. Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN

Judge Mrcs //True Copy//

More judgments on Section 221

All 136 judgments and leading authorities on Section 221 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →