GOOD HOME PRIVATE LTD. V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)

WP(C)/22297/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Good Home Private Ltd., which approached the High Court of Kerala challenging the appellate orders Exts.P9 and P10 issued by the First Appellate Authority under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner argued that despite their appeals being filed in 2014, the authority did not address them until 2020. Upon receiving a notice for a personal hearing, the petitioner requested an adjournment due to the Covid-19 pandemic, which was not granted, leading to the unfavorable appellate orders. The court, upon reviewing the circumstances, found the actions of the First Appellate Authority to be procedurally unfair and in violation of natural justice, leading to the quashing of the appellate orders and a directive for a rehearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 753268 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P K MENON; JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: BABU KARUKAPADATH; M A BABU; P U KUMAR; ARYA RAGHUNATH; VAISAKHI V
• Keywords: Adjournment; Appellate Authority; Covid-19; Income Tax; Natural Justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 15TH KARTHIKA, 1942 WP(C).No.22297 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: GOOD HOME PRIVATE LTD. HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 3RD FLOOR, PUTHOORAN PLAZA, KPCC JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682011, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. (AR.)B.R.AJIT. BY ADVS. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.P.U.VINOD KUMAR SMT.ARYA RAGHUNATH SMT.VAISAKHI V. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) KOCHI-1, POORNIMA BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682036. 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I(1), KOCHI, O/O.ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-I, CR BUILDINGS, IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) R1-2 BY JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.22297 OF 2020(J) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Exts.P9 and P10 appellate orders passed by the First Appellate Authority under the Income Tax Act. In the writ petition it is the case of the petitioner that while the appeals were preferred as early as in 2014 and the First Appellate Authority had not taken up the appeals for consideration till 2020, he was served with a notice for personal hearing in August 2020 and on receipt of the same, on account of the Covid-19 pandemic situation, he had sought for an adjournment. It is the case in the writ petition that the adjournment request was not considered favourably by the First Appellate Authority and Exts.P9 and P10 were passed in the appeal against the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I find that the conduct of the 1 st respondent First Appellate Authority in not granting an adjournment as sought for by the petitioner, under circumstances where the appeal itself was taken up more than six years after their filing, is nothing short of unfair procedure. There was no reason for the First Appellate Authority to pass orders in the appeals in such haste and that too without hearing the assessee. I am of the view that Exts.P9 and P10 appellate orders are vitiated by a non-compliance with the rules of natural justice. I, accordingly, dispose the writ petition by quashing Exts.P9 and P10 and directing the First Appellate Authority to pass fresh orders in the matter after hearing the WP(C).No.22297 OF 2020(J) 3 petitioner. To enable the 1st respondent to do so, I direct the petitioner to appear before the 1st respondent at 11 AM on 07.12.2020 either through physical appearance or through video conferencing, as the case may be. The 1st respondent shall pass orders in the matter within a month thereafter. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sd WP(C).No.22297 OF 2020(J) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.11.2013 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 2010. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.03.2014 WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.03.2015 WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11.08.2020 WITH RESPECT TO THE APPEAL RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11.08.2020 WITH RESPECT OF THE APPEAL RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST IN RESPECT OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 SUBMITTED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PETITIONER MR.B.PRATHAP, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS OFFICIAL E-MAIL. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADJOURNMENT REQUEST IN RESPECT OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 SUBMITTED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PETITIONER MR.B.PRATHAP, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS OFFICIAL E-MAIL. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2020 IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A)KOCHI-1/10310/2014-15 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT APPELLATE COMMISSIONER. WP(C).No.22297 OF 2020(J) 5 EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2020 IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A)KOCHI-1/10489/2015-16 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT APPELLATE COMMISSIONER. "