MIR REALTORS PVT. LTD. V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/21668/2012

AI Insights

MIR Realtors Pvt. Ltd., a company engaged in real estate development, filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer and other tax authorities challenging an order of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner had filed an appeal and a stay petition against the assessment order, which were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Meanwhile, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax ordered the petitioner to remit 50% of the total tax demand in installments, which the petitioner contested. The High Court's intervention was sought to stay the recovery proceedings pending the decision on the stay petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755902 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH NAIR; BIJOY CHANDRAN; M MATTHAI
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Real Estate Development; Stay Petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/27TH BHADRA 1934 WP(C).No. 21668 of 2012 (G) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- MIR REALTORS PVT. LTD., M.M.BUILDINGS, KALABHAVAN ROAD, KOCHI-682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI.ARUN KUMAR. BY ADVS.SRI.RAJESH NAIR SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI (SR.) RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (1), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-II), KERA BHAVAN, KOCHI-682011. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I (II), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: LSN WP(C).No. 21668 of 2012 (G) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 15.12.2011. EXHIBIT-P2. TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 12.1.2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 12.9.2012 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT SEEKING TO HEAR THE APPEAL. EXHIBIT-P4. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 12.9.2012 PRAYING FOR STAY OF THE COLLECTION OF THE DISPUTED TAX. EXHIBIT-P5. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER/REQUEST DATED 25.6.2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P6. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.6.2012 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE LSN ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.21668 OF 2012(G) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of September, 2012 J U D G M E N T Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. Petitioner is a company engaged in the business of real estate development. Ext.P1 is an order of assessment passed against the petitioner under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by that order, petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition, which are pending consideration of the 2nd respondent. Orders have not been passed on Ext.P4 and in the meanwhile petitioner moved the third respondent. On that application, the third respondent passed Ext.P6 order, directing the petitioner to remit 50% of the total demand in 18 equal monthly installments of Rs.17 lakhs each. It is aggrieved by Ext.P6 order and apprehending recovery for non-compliance thereof, this writ petition is filed. 3. Evidently, the appeal and stay petition are pending consideration before the 2nd respondent. Taking into account the huge demand that is raised against the petitioner, I feel that the WPC.No. 21668/2012 :2 : appropriate order to be passed is to require the appellate authority to consider Ext.P4 stay petition. This the appellate authority shall do as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In the meanwhile further proceedings to recover the amount due under Ext.P1 assessment order will be kept in abeyance. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 21668/2012 :3 : "