KC Santhosh V. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre and The Joint Commissioner (Appeals)/ Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre and The Income Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

WP(C)/31146/2023

AI Insights

The writ petition filed by KC Santhosh challenges the assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre for the assessment year 2018-2019, which treated the petitioner's total income significantly higher than what he had deposited. The petitioner had already filed an appeal against this order, which was pending, along with a stay petition. The primary concern was the potential initiation of coercive action for the assessed tax before the appeal and stay petition could be resolved. The court's intervention was sought to expedite the consideration of these pending matters.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797946 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WP(C) 29184 of 2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC
• Assessee Lawyers: KRISHNADAS P NAIR ADVOCATE; K L SREEKALA ADVOCATE; HARIDAS P NAIR ADVOCATE; M A VINOD ADVOCATE; SHINTO THOMAS ADVOCATE; K G MANOJ KUMAR ADVOCATE; PRASOON K P ADVOCATE; ANU PRABHAKAR ADVOCATE
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Coercive Action; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Stay Petition; Writ petition
• Section: 147; 144; 144B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 3RD ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 31146 OF 2023 PETITIONER: KC SANTHOSH AGED 51 YEARS S/O MUKUNDAN, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S ABLE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, MATTANNUR PO, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA PIN: 670 702. BY ADVS. KRISHNADAS P. NAIR K.L.SREEKALA HARIDAS P.NAIR M.A.VINOD SHINTO THOMAS K.G.MANOJ KUMAR PRASOON.K.P ANU PRABHAKAR RESPONDENTS: 1 ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE NEW DELHI-, PIN – 110 001. 2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)/ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-, PIN – 110 001. 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 670 012. SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 31146/2023 : 2 : DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J. --------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 31146 of 2023 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2023. JUDGMENT The present writ petition has been filed impugning Exhibit P1 assessment order passed by the assessment of Unit of National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi, under Section 147 r/w Sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 2018-2019, the assessing authority has treated the total income of the petitioner at Rs.1,40,93,485/-. In the relevant assessment year, the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.1,14,13,100/-. 2. The petitioner has challenged the said order by filing Exhibit P2 appeal before the first respondent. The appeal is pending before the second respondent, as is evident from Exhibit P3 e-filing acknowledgment. The petitioner has also filed Exhibit P4 stay petition along with the appeal. The petitioner has also thereafter issued with Exhibit P7 communication directing him to pay 20% of the demand amount as per Exhibit P1. It is also submitted that the appeal is filed with a delay and delay condonation application is also pending. The W.P.(C) No. 31146/2023 : 3 : petitioner apprehends that if Exhibit P2 appeal and stay petition are not considered by the second respondent, coercive action for the assessed tax will be initiated by the third respondent. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months. It is made clear that if Exhibit P2 appeal is not taken up for final hearing within three months as directed above, the second respondent should make every endeavour to decide the application for condonation of delay and also stay petition. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDGE. Rv W.P.(C) No. 31146/2023 : 4 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31146/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.02.2023 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.08.2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E-FILING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE APPEAL WITH NO.177462080100823 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.08.2023 Exhibit p4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.08.2023 Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C) 29184 OF 2023 ON 08.09.2023 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 04.09.2023 Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12.09.2023 RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL True Copy PS To Judge. rv "