KERALA ARTISANS AND SKILLED WORKERS WELFARE SCHEME V. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)

WP(C)/20235/2014

AI Insights

The case involves the Kerala Artisans and Skilled Workers Welfare Scheme, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Smt. T.L. Thankamony, as the petitioner, who challenged the recovery proceedings initiated by the Income Tax authorities while an appeal was pending. The petitioner had filed two appeals: one against the assessment order and another against the order rejecting the rectification of the assessment order. The court noted the significant delay of over 1400 days in filing the appeals and decided not to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, advising the petitioner to pursue the matter through the appellate authority.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699268 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: T M SREEDHARAN; M B PRAJITH; V P NARAYANAN; DIVYA RAVINDRAN
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Delay condonation; Income Tax; Recovery proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 154

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/16TH SRAVANA, 1936 WP(C).No. 20235 of 2014 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- KERALA ARTISANS AND SKILLED WORKERS WELFARE SCHEME, T.C.28/2857 (1), KUNNUMPURAM ROAD, VANCHIYOOR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SMT.T.L. THANKAMONY. BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADVS.SRI.M.B.PRAJITH SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), ROOM NO.407, 4TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAV AN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAV AN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.20235/2014 (D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 14/12/2009 PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 12/12/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(A): COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 12/12/2013 IN FILING THE APPEAL SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 18/12/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(B): COPY OF PETITION FOR STA Y DATED 12/12/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF ORDER U/S. 154 DATED 11/11/2013 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 12/12/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P3 ORDER. EXT.P4(A): COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 12/12/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16/06/2014 RECEIVED FROM THE SECOND RESPONDENT POSTING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 21/07/2014. EXT.P6: COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21/07/2014 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF LETTER DATED 2/08/2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C) No. 20235 of 2014 ====================== Dated this the 7th day of August, 2014 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved with the recovery proceedings initiated, when an appeal filed, is pending. The petitioner also submits that there is a delay condonation application filed. The learned Standing Counsel for Government of India Taxes would alertly point out that appeals have been filed with a delay of more than 1400 days. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are two appeals and in one, there is no delay. However it is to be noticed that, the delayed appeal is as against the assessment order and the appeal said to have been filed within time, is against the order rejecting W.P.(C) No. 20235 of 2014 2 rectification filed against the assessment order. In such circumstance, this Court is not inclined to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is dismissed leaving the petitioner to agitate its grievances before the appellate authority; including seeking interim orders against recovery. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // True Copy // P.A To Judge. "