M.BRIJESH V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/10207/2019

AI Insights

The case involves M. Brijesh, the proprietor of M/s. Geetham Sweets, who filed writ petitions against various respondents including the Income Tax Officer and several banks. The petitions sought additional time to pay dues as ordered by the tax authorities and permission to operate bank accounts. The court heard arguments from multiple counsels representing the petitioner and the respondents. The primary contention from the revenue's counsel was the petitioner's lack of seriousness in adhering to payment schedules. The court, while not fully granting the reliefs sought, decided to facilitate a resolution by directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's request for an extension on the payment deadline.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 771684 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH; DEEPAK JOY; AMAL GEORGE; S EASWARAN; M SASINDRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISANKAR MENON; MEERA MENON
• Keywords: Income Tax; Mandamus; Payment Dues; Writ petition; Bank Operation

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUESDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 10147 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: M.BRIJESH AGED 44 YEARS S/O. RAMANKUTTY GUPTHAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. GEETHAM SWEETS, 30/167, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, PALAKKAD-678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680 001. 3 UCO BANK MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 4 STATE BANK OF INDIA MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 5 INDIAN BANK KANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD-678 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 6 PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. SREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS MAANGER. W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -2- BY ADV. SRI.AMAL GEORGE, SC, SBI OTHER PRESENT: SC SRI. DEEPAK JOY., JOSE JOSEPH.,M. SASINDRAN., S. EASWARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.04.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).10207/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -3- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUESDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 10207 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: M.BRIJESH AGED 44 YEARS RAMANKUTTY GUPTHAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. GEETHAM SWEETS, 30/167, BIG BAZAR, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 1, PALAKKAD - 678 014. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 3RD FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, THRISSUR - 680 001 3 UCO BANK MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -4- 4 STATE BANK OF INDIA MARKET ROAD, PALAKKAD - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 5 INDIAN BANK KANDATH COMPLEX, PALAKKAD M - 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 6 PALAKKAD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., SREEKRISHNAPURAM BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS BY ADV. SRI.AMAL GEORGE, SC, SBI OTHER PRESENT: SC SRI. JOSE JOSEPH., SRI. S EASWARAN., M. SASINDRAN., SRI. DEEPAK JOY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.04.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).10147/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -5- J U D G M E N T [ WP(C) 10147/2019 ,WP(C).10207/2019 ] Heard Sri Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jose Joseph, the learned counsel for the first and second respondents, Sri Deepak Joy, the learned counsel for the third respondent, Sri Amal George, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent, Sri S Easwaran, the learned counsel for the fifth respondent and Sri M. Sasindran, the learned counsel for the sixth respondent. 2. The petitioner prays for the following reliefs in both the writ petitions: “(i) To direct the respondents to grant 2 months time to make payment of the dues towards the amount ordered at Ext.P2 by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction. (ii) To direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to operate his accounts with the respondents 3 to 6 Banks by the issue of writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or direction. (iii) To grant the petitioner such other incidental reliefs including the costs of these proceedings.” 3. Sri Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel, restricts his prayer to direct the respondents to dispose of Ext.P3 in both the writ W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -6- petitions and further submits that the petitioner would co-operate with the Department either in disposing of the representation or adhering to the time that may be granted in this behalf for paying the last instalment. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for revenue contends that in normal circumstances, he would not have opposed the writ prayer but the facts of the case on hand do not encourage the Court to show indulgence of any kind. According to the counsel, the petitioner is not treating the instalments stipulated by the Department with the required seriousness but with complete complacency and at the first instance prays for dismissing the writ petition. 5. He alternatively submits that it is for the petitioner to co- operate with the Department and if proper co-operation is extended, Ext.P3 representation to the extent of extension of time for paying the last instalment could be considered. The statement is placed on record. 6. The circumstances though are not encouraging straight away in exercising discretion in favour of the petitioner, but appreciating the bona fides to clear the last instalment without further recourse to law by W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -7- the Department, this Court is satisfied that the first respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P3 request in both the writ petitions to the limited extent of considering the time prayed by the petitioner for discharging the last instalment as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Communicate the judgment forthwith. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE jjj W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -8- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10147/2019 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 29.12.2016. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.12.2017. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 6.2.2019. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK DATED 30.3.2019. W.P.(C) Nos. 10147 & 10207/2019 -9- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10207/2019 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK "