Ashley Cherian V. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

WA/287/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Ashley Cherian, the appellant, who is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, holding agricultural properties in Idukki District. He filed a return for the assessment year 2020-2021 declaring a 'nil' income, which was selected for scrutiny. Subsequently, an assessment order demanding a tax of \'1,10,86,107 and a penalty order imposing \'7,91,113 were issued against him. The appellant challenged these orders in writ petitions, which were dismissed by the learned Single Judge, directing him to seek redress through the statutory appellate remedy. The appellant then filed writ appeals, which were also dismissed by the High Court, affirming the decision of the learned Single Judge.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 795742 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISANKAR MENON; K MEERA; V MENON; R SREEJITH
• Keywords: Assessment Order; CASS; Income Tax; Penalty order; Scrutiny
• Section: 142(1); 143; 271AAC(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WA NO. 287 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.1.2024 IN WP(C) NO.18139 OF 2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ASHLEY CHERIAN, AGED 46 YEARS S/O. CHERIAN PHILIP, THENAMMACKAL HOUSE, PAMAPADUMAPARA, IDUKKI, PIN - 685556 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON K.KRISHNA MEERA V.MENON PARVATHY MENON R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT: SC-JOSE JOSEPH. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024, ALONG WITH WA NO.308/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.287 & 308/2024 -:2:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WA NO. 308 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.01.2024 IN WP(C) NO.2136 OF 2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ASHLY CHERIAN, AGED 46 YEARS THENAMMACKAL HOUSE, PAMPADUMPARA P.O., IDUKKI- 685556., PIN - 685556 BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON K.KRISHNA MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: THE ADDL./JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-100 001., PIN - 100001 OTHER PRESENT: SC-JOSE JOSEPH. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024, ALONG WITH WA NO.287/2024 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.287 & 308/2024 -:3:- J U D G M E N T Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J. The appellant is an assessee under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. He is holding agricultural properties at Pampadumpara in Idukki District. He filed return of income for the assessment year 2020-2021 declaring total income as 'nil'. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS, and the appellant was issued notices under Sections 143 and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. Thereafter, assessment order dated 13/9/2022 (produced as Ext.P20 in WP(C) No.2136/2023) demanding `1,10,86,107/- and penalty order (produced as Ext.P5 in WP(C) No.18139/2023) under Section 271AAC(1) dated 23/3/2023 imposing a penalty of `7,91,113/- were passed. The appellant challenged the assessment order in WP(C) No. 2136/2023 and the penalty order in WP(C) No.18139/2023. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions, relegating the appellant to the statutory remedy of WA Nos.287 & 308/2024 -:4:- appeal. 2. We have heard Sri.Harisankar V.Menon, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. A perusal of the assessment order as well as the penalty order would show that those orders were passed after complying with all the statutory formalities. Even though the appellant has been given sufficient opportunity to produce the documents to prove his contentions, he failed to produce the necessary documents. Both the orders are appealable. The disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated in the writ petition. Instead of availing the appellate remedy, the appellant rushed to the writ court. We find no merit in the appeals. Accordingly, they are dismissed. Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp "