KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT V. THE COMMERCIAL OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

WP(C)/34812/2011

AI Insights

The Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation, a government company, filed a Writ Petition challenging recovery proceedings based on an assessment order. The petitioner argued that their appeal against the assessment order was not being heard due to the vacancy in the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. The court acknowledged the delay caused by the vacant position and directed that the stay petition be considered promptly once the office is filled, emphasizing the need for the department to expedite the appointment process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755964 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: M MATTHAI; SAJI VARGHESE; MARIAM MATTHAI; JWALA PAULOSE
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Recovery proceedings; Stay Petition; Writ petition

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2011 / 2ND POUSHA 1933 WP(C).No. 34812 of 2011(B) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, T.C. XI/266, KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. REP. BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.SAJI VARGHESE SMT.MARIAM MATTHAI SRI.JWALA PAULOSE RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, O/o. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1(1) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.34812/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 28.12.10 ISSUED BY R3. EXT. P2 : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE R2 DTD. 24.1.11. EXT. P3 : COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DTD. 2.11.11. EXT. P4 : COPY OF PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R3 DTD. 7.3.11. EXT. P5 : COPY OF LETTER DTD. 21.8.1969 ISSUED BY CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.34812 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Government Company, which has approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition, challenging the proceedings for recovery pursuant to the assessment order. 2. It is submitted that the assessment order is under challenge by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent and Exhibit P2 is the copy of the appeal filed on 24.11.2011. It is averred in paragraph No.3 of the Writ Petition that the appeal has not been posted for hearing in spite of repeated requests, since the Office of the Commissioner of Income-tax has been remaining vacant. Exhibit P3 is the copy of the stay petition. 3. Informing about the filing of the appeal, the petitioner has filed Exhibit P4 communication to the 3rd respondent also. 4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Office of the 2nd respondent is remaining vacant and nobody has been posted there and therefore the petitioner is not getting the required relief by way of W.P.(C)No.34812/11 -2- consideration of the stay petition. 5. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Department, who submitted that the petitioner can move the 3rd respondent in the matter. But as rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, moving the 3rd respondent is not an effective remedy so far as the petitioner is concerned. 6. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing consideration of the stay petition filed as per Exhibit P3, after the posting of the Officer in the office of the 2nd respondent, and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Department will see that the Office of the 2nd respondent is filled up without delay. Till orders are passed in the stay petition, further steps for recovery pursuant to the assessment order will be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn "