K.P. INDRABALAN vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/9559/2014HC KeralaKLHC01055185201401 April 2014Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the second respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to pass appropriate orders on the stay petition (Ext.P3) expeditiously, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Coercive proceedings were ordered to be kept in abeyance until such time as the stay petition is decided. The petitioner was directed to produce a copy of the judgment and the writ petition before the second respondent. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K.P. Indrabalan, is aggrieved by the assessment order dated February 24, 2014, for the assessment year 2011-12, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (first respondent). The petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (second respondent), which are pending. The petitioner's grievance is that coercive steps are being taken despite the pendency of these proceedings. The petitioner also filed a petition (Ext.P4) before the first respondent, to which a letter (Ext.P5) was issued. The writ petition seeks to intercept these coercive steps.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents can proceed with coercive steps while the petitioner's appeal and stay petition are pending before the appellate authority? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contends that coercive steps are being pursued without regard to the pending appeal and stay petition before the second respondent, and seeks intervention from the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Government Pleader was heard, but does not detail specific arguments made by the revenue regarding the coercive steps or the pendency of the appeal.

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 TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2014/11TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WP(C).No. 9559 of 2014 (T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.P. INDRABALAN, INDRAPRASTHAM, CHARUMOODU, MAVELIKKARA-690505. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SRI.SULEKHA BEEVIC.S. SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVALLA RANGE, THIRUVALLA. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ

WP(C).No. 9559 of 2014 (T) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.2.2014 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y 2011-2012 EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2011-2012. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 17.3.2014 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y.2011-2012. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.3.2014 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT P4 APPLICATION. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.C. No.9559 OF 2014 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2014. JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext.P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent in respect of the assessment year 2011-2012, the petitioner has already preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 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 respondents are proceeding with coercive steps, which hence are 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.P3 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. Coercive proceedings shall be kept

W.P.C.No.9559 OF 2014 2 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.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →