JACOB THOMAS, V. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/23188/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Jacob Thomas, the petitioner, who is contesting an assessment order and a penalty order issued by the income tax authorities. The petitioner has filed appeals against these orders and intends to file stay petitions to halt further proceedings based on these orders. The primary issue was the lack of an appropriate link to upload these stay petitions. The court heard arguments from both sides and decided that the petitioner should file the stay petitions directly with the third respondent, who will then forward them to the second respondent for a decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748575 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P(C) No.21323/2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: ABRAHAM MARKOS; V MARKOS; ISAAC ALEXANDER; JOSEPH SHARAD; JOHN VITHAYATHIL; AIBEL MATHEW; SIBY
• Keywords: Assessment Order; E-assessment; Income Tax; Penalty order; Stay Petition
• Section: 270A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 23188 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1 JACOB THOMAS, AGED 77 YEARS 1- MULAMOOTTIL, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689641. BY ADVS. ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS V.ABRAHAM MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA JOHN VITHAYATHIL AIBEL MATHEW SIBY RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110001 3 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689641 4 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI - 110001 SRI JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.23188 of 2023 2 C.S.DIAS, J. ------------------------- W .P .(C.) No.23188 of 2023 ------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2023 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed, inter alia, to direct the respondents to provide the petitioner with a link to upload the stay petitions proposed to be filed in Exts.P2 and P4 appeals. 2. The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order and Ext.P3 penalty order, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P2 and P4 appeals respectively, before the second respondent. During the pendency of Exts.P2 and P4 appeals, Ext.P5 demand notice has been issued. Hence, the petitioner proposes to file stay petitions in the said appeals to stay further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1, P3 and P5. But, WPC No.23188 of 2023 3 the petitioner is unable to upload the stay petitions for the want of the appropriate link. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard; Sri.Joseph Markos, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. Sri.Jose Joseph, on instructions, submitted that it will be upto the petitioner to file the stay petitions before the third respondent, who in turn, will transmit the stay petitions to the second respondent. The said submission is recorded. 5. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and after appreciating the rival submissions made across the Bar, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition. Resultantly, I order the writ petition as follows: WPC No.23188 of 2023 4 (i) It will be upto the petitioner to file the stay petitions in Exts.P2 and P3 appeals before the third respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. (ii) If the petitioner prefers the stay petitions as directed above, the third respondent shall transmit the stay petitions to the second respondent, in accordance with the procedure established by law. (iii) The second respondent shall on receipt of the stay petitions, consider and dispose of the same, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the stay petitions. (iv) Needless to mention, if the second respondent proposes to pass a conditional order of stay, he shall state reasons for the same. WPC No.23188 of 2023 5 (v) Until such time orders are passed on the proposed stay petitions, provided the petitioner completes the exercise as directed by this Court, the respondents are directed to defer further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1, P3 and P5. Sd/- C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/25-07 WPC No.23188 of 2023 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23188/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COMPUTATION SHEET DATED 28.09.2022 EXHIBIT P2 ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT OF INCOME TAX FORMS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21 ALONG WITH FORM 35 DATED 27.02.2023 EXHIBIT P3 PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 270A DATED 24.02.2023 EXHIBIT P4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT OF INCOME TAX FORMS ALONG WITH FORM 35 DATED 08.03.2023 EXHIBIT P5 DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.07.2023 EXHIBIT P6 JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2023 OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT IN W.P(C) NO.21323/2023 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE "