Coimbatore Traders V. The Income Tax Officer and The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre

WP(C)/15136/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Coimbatore Traders, a partnership firm engaged in trading vehicle body building products, which did not file an income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18. The Income Tax Officer issued notices under Sections 148 and 142 of the Income Tax Act due to a significant cash deposit of Rs. 2,31,23,940 in the financial year 2016-17. The firm responded to these notices, but the assessment was finalized, imposing a tax of Rs. 1,45,000. The firm challenged the assessment order in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, alleging non-consideration of their replies. The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the availability of an alternate remedy of appeal under the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797999 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P K MENON; JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISANKAR MENON; MEERA MENON
• Keywords: Cash deposit; Income tax assessment; Natural Justice; Non-filing of return; Writ petition
• Section: 148; 139; 246; 142

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 28TH BHADRA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 15136 OF 2022 PETITIONER: M/S. COIMBATORE TRADERS,, 34/360, KOKKALAI, THRISSUR-680 021, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, V.MUHAMMED RIYAS. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON(K/700/1997) MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, ST NAGAR, THRISSUR-680 001. 2 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110 001. BY ADVS. P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA ADV.JOSE JOSEPH-SC-IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.15136 of 2022 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 19th day of September, 2023 1. Heard Ms.Krishna K, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging Ext.P3 assessment order dated 30.06.2021 passed by the 2nd respondent for the assessment year 2017-18. 3. The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the trading of vehicle body building products like aluminium composite panel, automobiles spare parts and accessories, cables, glasses, plywoods etc. The petitioner did not filed income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner was issued notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, to which petitioner filed reply and thereafter notice under Section 142 was WPC No.15136 of 2022 3 issued. The petitioner also filed reply to the 142 notice. After considering the reply, the assessment proceedings were finalised by the impugned order and the petitioner has been assessed to the tax of Rs.1,45,000/-. The assessing authority has noted that the petitioner did not file the return of income under Section 139 of the Income Tax Act despite huge cash deposit in the financial year 2016-17 of Rs.2,31,23,940/-. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s reply has not been taken note of. Such contention is not worn out from the record inasmuch as the admissible deductions had been allowed while finalising the assessment proceedings. Once the petitioner was given opportunity and filed reply to the show cause notices, it cannot be said that there was violation of the principles of natural justice. The High Court should not be approached under Article 226 of the WPC No.15136 of 2022 4 Constitution of India against the assessment order passed under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. There is a statutory alternate remedy of appeal under Section 246 of the Act. To avoid the remedy of appeal, the present writ petition has been filed. 5. This Court does not find any ground to entertain such a writ petition, and therefore, this writ petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner approaches the appellate authority against the assessment order with the application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority may condone the delay inasmuch as the petitioner had approached this Court with this writ petition on 22.04.2022 and it has remained pending on the file of this Court till today. If the delay is condoned, the appellate authority should proceed with the appeal on merits and decide the same, expeditiously, in accordance with law. WPC No.15136 of 2022 5 6. With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP WPC No.15136 of 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15136/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 COPY OF RETURN OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. Exhibit P3 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 COPY OF E RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. Exhibit P5 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 COPY OF E RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. Exhibit P8 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P9 COPY OF ADJOURNMENT DETAILS FROM THE PORTAL OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. Exhibit P10 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. Exhibit P11 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDNET FOR THE YEAR 2017-18. Exhibit P12 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P13 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. "