SILPA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE (I) PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court directed the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext. P4) expeditiously, within one month from the date of receipt of the judgment. While considering the stay petition, the 2nd respondent is also directed to consider the amount already satisfied by way of appropriation pursuant to the notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act (Ext. P8). Crucially, further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P8 were ordered to be kept in abeyance until the stay petition is decided. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Silpa Projects and Infrastructure (I) Pvt Ltd., is aggrieved by an assessment order dated March 28, 2013, for the assessment year 2010-11, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (1st respondent). The petitioner has filed an appeal (Ext. P2) along with a stay petition (Ext. P4) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (2nd respondent), which are pending. The petitioner's grievance is that the State Bank of India (3rd respondent) is proceeding with further steps based on a notice (Ext. P8) issued by the 1st respondent under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, despite the pendency of the appeal and stay petition. The petitioner seeks intervention from the High Court to intercept these proceedings.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the 3rd respondent can proceed with further steps pursuant to Ext. P8 notice issued under Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, while the petitioner's appeal and stay petition are pending before the 2nd respondent? (Question of law and fact, concerning the procedural propriety and the impact of pending appellate proceedings on recovery actions). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contends that the 3rd respondent's actions are premature and ought to be intercepted as the primary appeal and stay petition are still under consideration by the appellate authority. The petitioner relies on the pendency of Ext. P2 appeal and Ext. P4 stay petition. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Government Pleader was heard. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities by the revenue are recorded in the provided text.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/19TH PHALGUNA, 1935 WP(C).No. 6692 of 2014 (J) --------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------------- SILPA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE (I) PVT LTD., PARAMARA ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), KOCHI, ERNAKULAM-682 018 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, 6TH FLOOR, KERA BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 011. 3. MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LISSIE HOSPITAL BRANCH, ERNAKULAM-682 018.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX R3 BY SRI.GEORGE THOMAS(MEVADA), SC, SBI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts
WP(C)NO.6692/2014 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 28/3/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT P2 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 6/4/2013 P3 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AALCS1733L/CIRCLE 4(1)/2012-13 DATED 17/9/2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P4 COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR STAY DATED 27/9/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.SPI/1282/2013-14 DATED 27/9/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P6 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AALCS1733L/CIRCLE 4(1)/2013-14 DATED 20/2/2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P7 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.SOP/1282/2013-14 DATED 4/3/2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P8 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AALCS1733L/2013-14/C-4(1)/EKM DATED 6/3/2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 6692 of 2014 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 10th day of March, 2014 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent for the assessment year 2010 - '11, the petitioner has already preferred Ext. P2 appeal along with Ext. P4 petition for stay, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that without any regard to the pendency of the above proceedings, the 3rd respondent is proceeding with further steps, as borne by Ext. P8 notice, which hence is sought to be intercepted by this Court. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P4 petition for stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. While considering the I.A. for stay, the second respondent shall also consider the amount already satisfied by way of appropriation, pursuant to Ext. P8 notice issued under Section 226
W.P.(C) No. 6692 of 2014 : 2 : (3) of the Income Tax Act. Further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P8 shall be kept in abeyance till such time. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd
More judgments on Section 226(3)
- Thoti Sankaraiah, Chittoor vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, ChittoorITA 2094/HYD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs Giridhari Homes Private Limited, HyderabadITA 92/HYD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs Giridhari Homes Private Limited, HyderabadITA 91/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Giridhari Homes Private Limited… vs ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2066/HYD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Giridhari Homes Private Limited… vs ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2065/HYD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kajaria Ceramics Limited vs. Mr Yomesh VijayaDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Marico Limited vs. Shree Uday Oil And Food Industries LLPDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Laborate Pharmaceuticals INDIA Limited vs. M/S Jmbs Healthcare Through Its PartnersDelhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Pharmed Limited vs. Best Biotech & Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026
- Kbb Nuts PVT. Limited vs. Mr. Suresh Chand & Ors.Delhi · 3 Nov 2026