G.RAJU V. UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/27095/2010

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by G. Raju, challenging the notices issued under Sections 16(2) and 16(4) of the Wealth Tax Act concerning the assessment of wealth tax. The petitions were filed due to the petitioner's concerns about the hasty finalization of the wealth tax assessments by the 2nd respondent, despite requests for adjournments due to the petitioner's Chartered Accountant's engagements and personal bereavement. The court was presented with the petitioner's arguments about the need for additional time to gather necessary documents and the impact of local authority decisions on the assessment. The government's counsel assured the court that the assessments were not finalized and that the petitioners would be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 679980 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2010
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Wealth Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH; N NANDAKUMARA MENON; P K MANOKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R S KALKURA; M S KALESH; HARISH GOPINATH; V VINAY MENON; M AJAY IRUMPANAM
• Keywords: Adjournment; Assessment; Chartered Accountant; Exparte; Wealth Tax
• Section: 16(2); 16(4)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27095 of 2010(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- G.RAJU, AGED 80 YEARS, S/O.M.GANGADHARAN, RESIDING AT `KARTHIKA', KALLUMOOD, T.C.30/349-21, NALUKETTU LANE, K.G.R.A.441, ANAYARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 029. BY ADVS. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (TAXES), CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI.-1 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KERA BHAVAN, COCHIN-682 011. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE II, DEVIKRIPA, PALLIMUKKU, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024. 4. THE CITY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, THIRUVANASNTHAPURAM-695 033. 5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ZONAL OFFICE, CITY CORPORATION, KADAKAMPALLI THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ZONAL OFFICE CITY CORPORATION, ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 011. R1 TO R3 BY ADV.SRI. JOSE JOSEPH R4 BY SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2010, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO.27098/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).Nos.27095 & 27098 of 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Subject matter involved in these writ petitions pertains to assessment of Wealth Tax. Petitioners were served with notices as contemplated under Section 16(2) of the Wealth Tax Act. Exts.P1 to P5 are the notices issued to the petitioner in WP(C).No.27098/2010 under Section 16(2) of the Act. Thereafter Exts.P6 to P10 notices were issued under Section 16(4) of the Act, since the petitioner failed to respond to the notice issued under Section 16(2). The petitioner was called upon to produce accounts if any on the date specified therein, otherwise it was informed that the assessments will be completed exparte. Similarly, Ext.P11 to P15 notices under Section 16(2) and Exts.P21 to P25 notices under Section 16(4) were issued to the petitioner in WP(C). No.27095/2010. 2. According to the petitioners, on receipt of notices under Section 16(4) they engaged a Chartered Accountant, who sought for an adjournment before the authority W.P.(C).27095/10 & 27098/10 -2- concerned, on the ground that he was otherwise occupied with the sitting of a judicial commission in the capacity as a technical member. It is the complaint of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent assessing authority had proceeded with finalisation of the assessment ignoring such requests made for adjournment. It is further submitted that there occurred a bereavement in the family of the Chartered Accountant since his mother passed away on 21.8.2010. Therefore the Chartered Accountant became compelled to seek a further adjournment on 22.8.2010. It was also submitted before the 2nd respondent that time is needed for collecting certain documents from various Government officials which is to be produced in order to substantiate the contentions against the proposed assessment. In WP(C).No.27095/2010 it was also submitted before the assessing authority that the petitioner therein had already approached the local authority, Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, seeking a certificate evidencing the fact that construction of building is not possible in a property which is considered as an asset. According to the petitioner, an adjournment of finalisation till such certificate is obtained, is absolutely necessary. W.P.(C).27095/10 & 27098/10 -3- 3. Apprehension expressed by the petitioners in both these cases is regarding hasty steps being pursued by the 2nd respondent in finalising the assessment, on an exparte basis, without affording further opportunity to the petitioners for producing relevant documents. It is also apprehended that inspite of adjournment sought for by the Chartered Accountant, the matter will be finalised without affording further opportunity of hearing. 4. Standing Counsel for Government of India (Taxes), appearing on behalf of respondents, on the basis of instructions, submitted that the assessment has not so far been finalised and that the authority concerned is ready to afford reasonable opportunity to the petitioners for production of documents as well as for personal hearing. The above submission is recorded. 5. Under the above circumstances the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the 2nd respondent in WP(C). No.27098/2010 (who is the 3rd respondent in WP(C). No.27095/2010) to afford reasonable opportunity to the petitioners for production of documents and also for personal hearing, before finalisng the assessments. 6. Posting of the matter for affording such opportunities W.P.(C).27095/10 & 27098/10 -4- shall be duly intimated to the petitioners. However, if there is any deliberate default from the side of the petitioners either in attending the hearing or in co-operating with finalisation of the proceedings, it is left open to the authority to proceed with further steps. The undertaking given on behalf of the petitioners that they will not seek any adjournment when the matter is posted for consideration is hereby recorded. 7. In WP(C).No.27095/2010 a further direction is sought for against respondents 4 to 6 for issuing certificate as requested under Exts.P26 to P29. Respondents 4 to 6 are directed to consider those applications and to take a decision thereof at the earliest, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb "