M.M.SHAJAHAN V. UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/23492/2017

AI Insights

The case involves M.M. Shajahan, the petitioner, who challenged an order from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, which was passed ex-parte. The petitioner argued that the order was unjust as it was made without his presence or adequate representation. The Income Tax Department's counsel countered that the petitioner had multiple opportunities to present his case but failed to do so adequately. The court decided to allow the petitioner another opportunity to present his case, provided he paid a cost of Rs.10,000, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness while also holding the petitioner accountable for his previous non-compliance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 677846 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: M NAMBIAR; P GOPINATH; K MATHAI; JOSON MANAVALAN; KURYAN THOMAS; PAULOSE ABRAHAM
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Demand notice; Ex-parte; Income Tax; Revision petition

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2017/26TH ASHADHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 23492 of 2017 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- M.M.SHAJAHAN, FLAT NO.12B, HEERAN IFOCITY KUZHIVILA POST, TRIVANDRUM - 690 005. BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR TRIVANDRUM - 695 003. 3. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3) 5TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN KOWDIAR, TRIVANDRUM - 695 003 R BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23492 of 2017 (J) APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ACCOMPANYING DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11.03.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER AND THE ACCOMPANYING DEMAND NOTICE DATED 23.09.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.01.2016 ALONG WITH THE ENCLOSURES, SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 29.01.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ENCLOSURE NO.(IV) (WITHOUT OTHER ENCLOSURE) EXT.P5 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE SB K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. ===================== W.P.(C)No.23492 of 2017 - J =========================== Dated this the 17th day of July, 2017 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved with Ext.P5 order or the Principal Commissioner of Income tax. The petitioner submits that the same has been passed ex-parte. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department submits on instructions that even for the assessment, the petitioner did not appear for hearing. In the revision, the petitioner was given an opportunity for hearing on 10.03.2017. The petitioner appeared on that day without any details and again sought for time. To enable filing of details to justify his claim, the case was posted to 17.03.2017, on which date, none appeared. In such circumstance, there is no defect on the part of the Officer in having set the petitioner ex-parte. 3. In such circumstance, on condition of the petitioner paying costs, the petitioner is permitted to file details and appear W.P.(C)No.23492/2017 2 before the Officer on 22.08.2017 at 11.00 a.m, on which date, a further date of hearing shall be given and the matter shall be concluded. The petitioner would pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) under Chalan No.280 to the Head of Account “Tax on income other than Companies”, sub-Head “Self assessment tax (others)”, within a period of two weeks, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and produce the receipt before the 2nd respondent. The writ petition would stand disposed of. No costs. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB/17/07/2017 "