Anoriphy Ksoo V. The Union of India and The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong and National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and Income-Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi and The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 1, Shillong

WP(C)/97/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Anoriphy Ksoo, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against multiple respondents including the Union of India and various officials from the Income Tax Department. The petition sought a stay on an assessment order dated 19.03.2022 and a recovery notice dated 09.02.2024, pending the disposal of an appeal at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The petitioner argued for an expedited hearing of the appeal without coercive actions during the interim. The court, however, did not address the merits of the case but directed the appellate authority to resolve the appeal within a specified timeframe, ensuring no adjournments beyond 15 working days.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799998 (HC-MEGHALAYA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J MORE
• Assessee Lawyers: R SHANKAR MISHRA
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Recovery notice; Stay

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 3 HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 97 of 2024 Date of order: 01.05.2024 Anoriphy Ksoo vs. 1. The Union of India Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Finance. 2. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong, Income Tax Department. 3. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department. 4. Income-Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department. 5. National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department. 6. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department. 7. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 1, Shillong, Income Tax Department. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Vaidyanathan, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. R. Shankar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. J. More, Adv. Serial No. 01 Supplementary List Page 2 of 3 O R D E R (Made by Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief: “In the premises aforesaid, it is therefore prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased to consider the above, call for the records, issue a rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned Assessment order dated 19.03.2022 shall not be stayed pending disposal of the Appeal pending before the Respondent No. 6 and further as to why the Respondent No. 6 shall not be directed to dispose of the Appeal of the Petitioner at an earliest upon such cause or causes that may be shown hearing the parties perusing the records further be pleased to make the rule absolute and/or pass any other order or orders as Your Lordship deem fit and proper. - And – It is further prayed that pending disposal of this rule, the impugned Assessment order dated 19.03.2022 as well as the recovery notice dated 09.02.2024 may be stayed and/or the respondent authorities may be directed not to take any steps for recovery of impugned demand.” 2. Heard the petitioner and the respondents counsel. The petitioner has confined his relief that the appeal has to be heard at the earliest point of time but there is a rider stating that no coercive action will be taken till the disposal of the appeal. We are not inclined to pass any order on merits except directing the Appellate Authority to decide the matter in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order, preferably on or before 15.08.202, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. The hearing shall not be adjourned beyond 15 working days at any point of time. In case the petitioner fails to cooperate, it is open to the Appellate Authority to record the same and pass orders based on the available records. Page 3 of 3 3. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. (W. Diengdoh) (S. Vaidyanathan) Judge Chief Justice Meghalaya 01.05.2024 “Sylvana PS” "