NADARAJAN NEELAKANDAN V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/25364/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Nadarajan Neelakandan, an 80-year-old petitioner, who filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner was aggrieved by a demand notice and assessment order issued for the assessment year 2015-16. He had previously filed an appeal and a stay application, both of which were pending without a timely decision. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to expedite the hearing and decision on his appeal and stay application, citing his age and the prolonged delay in the proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 753262 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: O NAMBIAR; GEEN MATHEW
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Demand notice; Income Tax; Senior citizen; Stay Petition
• Section: 246A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1942 WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U) PETITIONER : NADARAJAN NEELAKANDAN AGED 80 YEARS S/O.NEELAKANDAN,GURUVIHAR, KUNNATHUMALA,VADASSERIKONAM, POST-695143, CHEMMARUTHY VILLAGE,VARKALA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2),KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695003. R BY SRI CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM - STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U) JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is an assesee on the file of the 1st respondent, has filed Ext.P2 appeal dated 18.01.2019 before the 2nd respondent Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) invoking the provisions under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, feeling aggrieved by Ext.P1 demand notice and assessment order dated 21.12.2018 issued by the 1st respondent for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner has also filed Ext.P3 application for stay dated 09.10.2019 in Ext.P2 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner is that though Ext.P3 application for stay was heard on 31.10.2019, based on Ext.P4 notice dated 18.10.2019, the 2nd respondent is yet to pass orders on that application. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 80 years and that, Ext.P2 appeal, which is one filed on 18.01.2019, requires an early disposal. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to hear the petitioner and the 1st respondent and -3- WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U) dispose of Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department would submit that though Ext.P2 appeal filed by the petitioner is ripe for hearing, due to pendency of large number of appeals, the 2nd respondent requires further time for final disposal of that appeal. The 2nd respondent shall pass orders on Ext.P3 application for stay within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to conduct a re-hearing on Ext.P3 application for stay, with notice to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, and pass orders on that application, within a further period of two -4- WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U) weeks. The 2nd respondent shall also consider the request of the petitioner for early disposal of Ext.P2 appeal, considering the fact that he is a senior citizen aged 80 years. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE AV/20/11 -5- WP(C).No.25364 OF 2020(U) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 21.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 09.10.2019 FILED IN EXHIBIT P2 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETER NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2019-20/1019062994(1) DATED 18.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE URGENT HEARING PETITION DATED 14.03.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE URGENT HEARING PETITION DATED 17.09.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. "