SHRI.K.JAFFER, KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/608/2014HC KeralaKLHC01046238201407 January 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Second Respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals) to consider the stay petitions (Exhibits P3(a) and P4(a)) filed by the petitioner against the assessment orders within two months, with notice to the petitioner. Pending this consideration, coercive steps pursuant to the assessment orders were ordered to be put on hold. Regarding the penalty orders, the Court directed that any stay application made by the petitioner in his statutory appeals against these orders would be dealt with by the Second Respondent within two months. The notices under Section 226(3) (Exhibit P9 series) were ordered to be put on hold for three months, maintaining the status quo. The direction in Exhibit P12 order to pay the amount in six installments was also suspended. The petitioner was directed to produce a copy of the writ petition and judgment before the Second Respondent for compliance. The writ petition was disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri. K. Jaffer, a fruit merchant, filed appeals (Exhibits P3 and P4) against assessment orders (Exhibits P1 and P2) for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. He also filed stay petitions (Exhibits P3(a) and P4(a)) due to apprehension of coercive steps before the disposal of his appeals. The petitioner also filed appeals against penalty orders (Exhibits P5 series and P6 series) under Sections 271A and 271B of the Income Tax Act for the same assessment years. Notices under Section 226(3) were issued to banks and an association (Exhibit P9 series). An order under Section 154 was passed (Exhibit P11), and proceedings were initiated (Exhibit P12) directing payment in six installments. The petitioner sought interim relief from the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Second Respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals) should consider the stay petitions (Exhibits P3(a) and P4(a)) filed by the petitioner against the assessment orders (Exhibits P1 and P2) within a specified period? The petitioner contended that he was apprehensive of coercive steps before the disposal of his appeals and stay petitions. The Revenue's contentions are not recorded. 2. Whether the Second Respondent should consider any application for stay filed by the petitioner against the penalty orders (Exhibits P5 series and P6 series) within a specified period? The petitioner's appeals against these penalty orders were filed, but he had not yet moved for a stay. The Revenue's contentions are not recorded. 3. Whether coercive steps pursuant to the assessment orders (Exhibits P1 and P2) should be put on hold pending consideration of the stay petitions? The petitioner sought this relief due to apprehension of immediate recovery actions. The Revenue's contentions are not recorded. 4. Whether the notices under Section 226(3) (Exhibit P9 series) and the direction to pay in installments (Exhibit P12) should be put on hold? The petitioner sought this to maintain the status quo and enable him to obtain interim orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271A,Section 271B,Section 226(3),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/17TH POUSHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 608 of 2014 (A) -------------------------- PETITIONER -------------------------- SHRI.K.JAFFER, FRUIT MERCHANT, IFC FRUITS, TALIPARAMBA KANNUR BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE I, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR 670006 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKARA BHAVAN, NORTH BLOCK, MANANCHIRA CALICUT 673001 R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 608 of 2014 (A) -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26-09-2011 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE -DO- FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 29-10- 2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09 EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION -DO- EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 29-10- 2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 EXHIBIT P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION -DO- EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271A DATED 30-03-2012 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271B DATED 30-03-2012 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271A DATED 30-03- 2012 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6(A)TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271B DATED 30-03- 2012 FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 27-04- 2012 AGAINST ORDER LEVYING PENALTY U/S 271A FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2008-09 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7(A) TRUECOPY OF THE -DO- U/S 271B

WP(C).No. 608 of 2014 (A) -------------------------- --2- EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 27-04- 2012 AGAINST ORDER LEVYING PENALTY U/S 271A FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE -DO-U/S 271B EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13-08-2013 ISSUED U/S 226(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT TO THE SECRETARY, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, TALIPARAMBA EXHIBIT P9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE -DO- TO THE SECRETARY, TALIPARAMBA MERCHANT ASSOCIATION, TALIPARAMBA EXHIBIT P9(B) TRUE COPY OF THE -DO- TO THE SECRETARY, CANARA BANK, KANNUR EXHIBIT P9(C)COPY OF THE DO TO THE SECRETARY, VIJAYA BANK, TALIPARAMBA EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26-08-2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03-09-2013 U/S 154 OF THE ACT PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 04-09-2013 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE SMM

V.CHITAMBARESH,J. = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.608 of 2014 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 7th day of January, 2014

J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Exts.P3 and P4 appeals against Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment. The appeals are accompanied by Exts.P3(a) and P4(a) petitions for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner is apprehensive of coercive steps even before the disposal of the appeals and the petitions aforestated. 2. I direct the second respondent to consider Exts.P3(a) and P4(a) petitions with notice to the petitioner within a period of two months. The coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 orders of assessment shall be put on hold in the meanwhile. 3. The petitioner has also filed Ext.P7 series and P8 series appeals against Ext.P5 series orders imposing penalty. The petitioner is yet to move an application for stay in the above statutory appeals. The motion, if any, made by the petitioner in this regard shall be dealt with by the second respondent within a period of two months. 4. Ext.P9 series notices shall be put on hold for a period of three months and the status quo maintained. This is to enable

W.P.(C) No.608 of 2014 2 the petitioner to obtain interim orders in the appeals aforestated. Needless to say that the direction in Ext.P12 order to pay the amount in six instalments shall also remain under suspended animation. 5. 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 smm

More judgments on Section 271A

All 701 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →