T.M. HASSAINR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/28813/2013HC KeralaKLHC01071998201322 November 2013Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P3) within a period of two months, after issuing notice to the petitioner. Furthermore, the Court ordered that coercive steps pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) and the demand notice (Ext.P4) shall be put on hold until orders are passed on the stay petition. The petitioner was directed to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the second respondent for compliance. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Hassainar T.M., filed an appeal (Ext.P2) against an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2010-2011, issued by the Income Tax Officer (1st respondent). The appeal was accompanied by a stay petition (Ext.P3) seeking a stay on the recovery of disputed tax. The petitioner also received a demand notice (Ext.P4) in the interim, which further aggrieved him. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala seeking directions regarding the pending appeal and stay petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the second respondent (The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) should consider the stay petition (Ext.P3) filed by the petitioner in a timely manner, considering the pending appeal against the assessment order (Ext.P1)? (Question of procedure). Assessee's contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of the stay petition and a stay on coercive recovery steps until the stay petition is decided. Revenue's contention: No specific contention is recorded for the revenue in the judgment regarding this issue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 28813 of 2013 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- HASSAIANR T.M. CHUNGATHARA HOUSE MASJID LANE, THAMMANAM KOCHI 682 032.

BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.K.UMAMAHESWAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2), C.R. BUILDINGS I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI 682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) C.R. BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD KOCHI - 682 018.

BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 28813/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 : COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.03.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-2011. EXHIBIT P2 : COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1.\ EXHIBIT P3 : COPY OF STAY PETITION IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 07.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE.

V. CHITAMBARESH, J -------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 28813 OF 2013 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2013 JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 order of assessment. The appeal is accompanied by Ext.P3 petition for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 demand notice served on him in the meanwhile. 2. I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P3 petition with notice to the petitioner within a period of two months. The coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 order and Ext.P4 notice shall be put on hold till orders are passed on Ext.P3 petition as directed above. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. V. CHITAMBARESH

JUDGE ncd

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →