JOHN JOSEPH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WA/350/2017

AI Insights

The case involves two writ appeals, WA No. 350/2017 and WA No. 352/2017, filed by John Joseph and Ancy John respectively, against the order/judgment in WPC 35054/2016 and WPC 35020/2016 of the High Court of Kerala. The appellants challenged the reopening of their income tax assessments and the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer in the communication dated 31.07.2015. The learned Single Judge had dismissed their writ petitions, leading to these appeals. The main legal contention revolved around the sufficiency and clarity of the reasons provided for reopening the assessments under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act. The court, upon reviewing the submissions and the documents provided, upheld the dismissal of the writ petitions, allowing the assessments to stand.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751514 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: M GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR; K JOHN MATHAI; JOSON MANAVALAN; KURYAN THOMAS; RAJAKANNAN
• Keywords: Assessment Reopening; Income Tax; Reason to believe; Writ Appeal
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WA NO. 350 OF 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 35054/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/S: JOHN JOSEPH KALLUNKAL HOUSE, KENICHIRA P.O. PANAMARAM, WAYANAD BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.RAJA KANNAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.2, KALPETTA, WAYANAD- 673 122 2 THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (INCOEM TAX) RANGE 2, KOZHIKODE- 673 001 OTHER PRESENT: ADV. PARVATHI FOR THE APPELLANT., SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, ALONG WITH WA.352/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.350/2017, 352/2017 -2- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WA NO. 352 OF 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC 35020/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/S: ANCY JOHN W/O. JOHN JOSEPH, KALLUNKAL HOUSE, KENICHIRA P.O., PANAMARAM, WAYANAD BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.RAJA KANNAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.2, KALPETTA, WAYANAD - 673 122. 2 ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (INCOME TAX),RANGE 2, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. OTHER PRESENT ADV. PARVATHI FOR THE APPELLANT., SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, ALONG WITH WA.350/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.350/2017, 352/2017 -3- JUDGMENT [WA Nos.350/2017, 352/2017] S.V.Bhatti,J. The writ petitioners are the appellants. The appeals are filed being aggrieved by the common order dated 21.12.2016 in W.P.(C) Nos.35020 & 35054 of 2016. The appellants questioned the orders reopening the assessments and also the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer in the communication dated 31.07.2015 as illegal and unsustainable. The learned Single Judge through the common judgment impugned in the appeal dismissed the writ petitions and the findings recorded on the grounds of challenge read thus: “6. There is no dispute about the legal position involved in the matter. Before an assessment is reopened in terms of Sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, necessarily, it is open for the assessee to request for the reason to believe. In this case, when request was made by the assessee, the reason to believe had been given. Though in Ext.P5, at para 12, the following alone has been stated; “12. It may be noted that the findings of survey, which WA Nos.350/2017, 352/2017 -4- is the basic reason for reopening your case was already discussed in detail with your husband and his staff members who is handling your entire business activities as submitted by you during the post survey proceedings and consolidated day book details for FY2011-12, FY2012-13 and FY2013-14 based on the findings of the survey was even submitted to the department. Further proceedings under Section 143(3) for AY2012-13 which was pending in your husband Shri John Joseph's case was finished on the basis of the said details. Thus it clear that the necessary copies regarding the findings of the survey are already available with your group.” the enclosure which has been annexed along with the documents clearly narrates why the assessment had to be reopened. Learned counsel for the petitioners however has a case that the enclosure that had been given was for internal purpose and was not intended to be a notice given to the petitioners indicating the reason to believe. In so far as the enclosure is enclosed along with Ext.P5 series and Ext.P7 series, necessarily, the petitioners are put to notice regarding the reason to believe by which the assessment had been reopened. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that necessary particulars had already been given to the petitioner showing the reasons to believe and there is no reason why this Court should sit in judgment over the same and take a different view in the matter.” 2. During the pendency of the writ petitions the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and our attention is invited to the assessment order dated 31.03.2015. In other words, through the proceedings/notice assailed in the writ WA Nos.350/2017, 352/2017 -5- petitions, the Assessing Officer made the final order. Therefore, we are pursuaded not to examine the reasons given by the learned Single Judge or the grounds urged challenging Exts.P5 and P7. By leaving open the options and contentions available against the assessment order dated 31.03.2015 the writ appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- BASANT BALAJI JUDGE JS "