Mundampra Mohammed Faez V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

WA/2162/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Mundampra Mohammed Faez, the appellant, who challenged the recovery steps initiated by the Income Tax Department following an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2016-2017. The appellant had filed an appeal (Ext.P2) and a stay petition (Ext.P3) against the assessment order, which were pending before the appellate authority. The primary concern was the initiation of recovery proceedings before the stay petition could be considered. The Single Judge of the High Court directed the respondents to dispose of the appeal and stay petition but did not stay the recovery proceedings. The appellant, seeking relief from the recovery actions, filed a writ appeal, which led to the modification of the Single Judge's order to stay the recovery proceedings pending the decision on the stay petition or appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 681161 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL NAIR; TELMA RAJU
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Recovery proceedings; Stay Petition; Writ Appeal
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 2162 OF 2023 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 1.12.2023 IN WP(C) 40229/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: MUNDAMPRA MOHAMMED FAEZ MPB MALIYAKKAL HOUSE AREEKODE PO MALAPPURAM KERALA, PIN - 673639 BY ADVS.ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN NORTH BLOCK, NEW ANNEX BUILDING, MANANCHIRA KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 SC, SRI JOSE JOSEPH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.No.2162/2023 -:2:- J U D G M E N T Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. The petitioner in WP(C).No. 40229 of 2023 is the appellant herein aggrieved by the judgment dated 1.12.2023 in the Writ Petition. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this Writ Appeal are as follows: 2. The appellant had impugned Ext.P1 assessment order before this Court in the Writ Petition when confronted with recovery steps for recovery of the amounts confirmed against it by the assessment order. It was the case of the appellant that against Ext.P1 assessment order he has preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition for the assessment year 2016-2017 under the Income Tax Act. The apprehension of the appellant was that even before consideration of the stay petition there would be recovery steps initiated by the respondents for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the appellant by Ext.P1assessment order. 3. The learned Single Judge who considered the matter directed the respondents to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition within a time frame. The learned Single Judge, however, did not grant a stay of recovery proceedings pending disposal of the stay petition by the respondents. It is for this limited relief that the appellant is before us through the present appeal. W.A.No.2162/2023 -:3:- 4. We have heard Sri. Anil D. Nair, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing counsel for the Income Tax Department. In our view, since the learned Single Judge had relegated the appellant to the alternative remedy before the statutory authority it was incumbent upon the learned Judge to protect the appellant from recovery proceedings pending disposal of the petition by the respondent appellate authority. Accordingly, we modify the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge to the limited extent of clarifying that pending disposal of the stay petition or appeal whichever is earlier by the appellate authority, the recovery proceedings against the appellant for recovery of the amounts confirmed against him by Ext.P1assessment order shall be kept in abeyance. Save for this limited modification, the rest of the directions in the impugned judgment are not interfered with. Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp "