O.P. ACHUTHANKUTTY V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/6631/2018

AI Insights

The case involves O.P. Achuthankutty, the petitioner, who is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, contesting the assessment orders issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Thrissur. The petitioner filed appeals against the assessment orders for the years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16, which were not decided in a timely manner by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Additionally, the petitioner sought a stay on the payment demands from these assessments, which was partially granted by requiring a 20% payment. The petitioner challenged the delay in the appellate decision and the conditions of the stay, leading to this writ petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755319 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: C UNNIKRISHNAN; JOHNSON GOMEZ
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Stay Application; Delay in Passing Orders
• Section: 220(6)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 6631 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) O.P. ACHUTHANKUTTY, AGED 63 YEARS,S/O.GOVINDA MENON,VIII-603,\"SHANTHI\",NEAR MAMMIYOOR TEMPLE,GURUVAYUR,THRISSUR-680101. BY ADVS.SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,AYAKAR BHAVAN,S.T.NAGAR,THRISSUR-688001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), AYAKAR BHAVAN,COCHIN. 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), COCHIN. 4. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIR PERSON,C-II/49,SATYA MARG, CHANAKYAPURI,NEW DELHI-110021. 5. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE/FINANCE, 128 A,NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI-110001. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 6631 of 2018 (D) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXT. P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 29.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 29.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 13/01/2018 ALONG WITH CHALLAN AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF 2013-14. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 13/01/2018 ALONG WITH CHALLAN AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF 2014-15 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED ON 13/01/2018 ALONG WITH CHALLAN AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF 2015-16 EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 28.01.2018 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF 2013-14 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 28.01.2018 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF2014-15 EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 28.01.2018 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF2915-16. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.AFWPA 1021N/DCIT/(CC)/TCR/2017-18 DATED 01.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED -09.02.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.AFWPA 1021N/DCIT(CC)/TCR/2017-18 DATED 19.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 28.02.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. // TRUE COPY // Sd/- PS TO JUDGE. Kvs/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.6631 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. Aggrieved by Exts.P1 to P3 assessment orders, the petitioner preferred Exts.P4 to P6 appeals before the second respondent. Ext.P13 is the composite application for stay filed by the petitioner in Exts.P4 to P6 appeals. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Exts.P4 to Ext.P6 appeals. It is stated that though the petitioner moved for stay before the the competent authority under sub-section (6) of Section 220 of the Act, the petitioner was called upon to pay 20% of the demand while granting the stay sought for by him in terms of Ext.P10 communication and the said decision has been affirmed by the third respondent in terms of Ext.P12 communication. It is alleged by the petitioner that since the said directions have not been complied with by the petitioner, proceedings have been WPC.No.6631 of 2018 2 initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P1 to P3 orders. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P13 composite application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, untrammelled by Exts.P10 and P12 communications. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until orders are passed on Ext.P13 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Exts.P1 to P3 assessment orders shall be deferred. Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Kvs/- // true copy // "