M/S.HOLY FAITH BUILDERS V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/27338/2013

AI Insights

The case involves M/S. Holy Faith Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd, represented by its managing director, Sany Francis, who filed a writ petition against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and other respondents concerning an assessment order and subsequent demand notices for tax recovery. The petitioner appealed against the assessment order dated 01/12/2011 for the year 2009-10 and sought a stay on the recovery of the disputed tax. The court's judgment focused on the procedural aspect of allowing the petitioner to contest the tax demand without immediate financial coercion, thereby facilitating a fair hearing on the stay application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 766937 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH; T RAJESH; THOMAS MUNDACKAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PEEYUS KOTTAM
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Demand notices; Income Tax; Stay of recovery
• Section: 226(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/16TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 27338 of 2013 (N) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------------- M/S. HOLY FAITH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, 34/2353, MAMANGALAM, PALARIVATTAM P.O., ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 025, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SANY FRANCIS, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.C.FRANCIS. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 018 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 (2), COCHIN, PIN-682 018 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC BANK LTD, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 016 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD, PACHALAM, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 012 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, PALARIVATTAM BRANCH, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 025. R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX R3 BY SRI.T.RAJESH,SC, HDFC BANK R5 BY SRI.THOMAS JAMES MUNDACKAL,SC, SBI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.27338/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 01/12/2011 FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 11/01/2012 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 11/01/2012 FOR RS.2,000/- OF STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE PAID BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR PREFERRING APPEAL P4 COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION DATED 17/10/2013 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P2 A PPEAL P5 COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 19/03/2013 FOR RS.25,00,000/- OF STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE PAID BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT P5(A) COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 19/03/2013 FOR RS.12,50,000/- OF STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE PAID BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT P6 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AC.CIR.1(2)/AABCH6383D/226(3)/2013-14 DATED 11/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT P6(A) COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AC.CIR.1(2)/AABCH6383D/226(3)/2013-14 DATED 11/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT P6(B) COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AC.CIR.1(2)/AABCH6383D/226(3)/2013-14 DATED 11/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts V.CHITAMBARESH,J. = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.27338 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 7th day of November, 2013 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 order of assessment under the Income Tax Act. The appeal is accompanied by Ext.P4 petition for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P6 series demand notices served on the bank wherein the accounts are maintained. 2. I direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P4 petition with notice to the petitioner within a period of two months. The coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P6 series notices shall be put on hold in the meanwhile. Needless to say that the petitioner can be permitted to operate the accounts in the bank pending final orders on Ext.P4 petition for stay. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition with the judgment before the first respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of. V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE smm "