M/S.OLARI LITTLE FLOWER KURIES LIMITED V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/1757/2018

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Olari Little Flower Kuries Limited, the petitioner, who is an assessee under the Income Tax on the rolls of the first respondent, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Thrissur. The petitioner challenged the self-assessment revision under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, which resulted in an assessment order (Ext.P3) and a demand notice (Ext.P4) for a sum of Rs. 17,78,350. The petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P6) against the assessment order and a stay application (Ext.P7) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur. The writ petition was filed due to the inaction of the second respondent in deciding on the stay application, seeking appropriate directions for a decision on the stay application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755361 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH; V K SHAMSUDHEEN
• Assessee Lawyers: G HARIHARAN; PRAVEEN; K S SMITH; JINU ANTONY; V R SANJEEV KUMAR
• Keywords: Assessment; Income Tax; Limited scrutiny; Stay Application
• Section: 143(3); 271(1)(c); 274

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 5TH MAGHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 1757 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) M/S.OLARI LITTLE FLOWER KURIES LIMITED LITTLE FLOWER CHURCH, SHOPPING COMPLEX, OLARIKKARA, THRISSUR 680 012 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN C.D SUNNY BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.K.S.SMITHA SMT.JINU ANTONY SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2),THRISSUR 680 001 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THRISSUR 680 001 R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX R BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 1757 of 2018 (T) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 04-12-2017 IN RESPONSE TO THE LIMITED SCRUTINY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22-12-2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 22-12-2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER DEMANDING A SUM OF RS. 17,78,350/- TO PAID WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22-12-2017 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1) C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 12-01-2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) THRISSUR ( TRUE COPY ) PS TO JUDGE. Kvs/- P .B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P .(C).No.1757 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of January, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income T ax on the rolls of the first respondent. The self assessment made by the petitioner has been revised under Section 143(3) of the Income T ax Act in terms of Ext.P3 order of assessment. Ext.P3 order has been challenged by the petitioner in Ext.P6 appeal. Ext.P7 is the application preferred by the petitioner for stay in Ext.P6 appeal. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the second respondent in taking a decision on Ext.P7 application for stay. 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 WPC.No.1757 of 2018 2 case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P7 application, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that till a decision is taken on Ext.P7 application, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P3 order shall be deferred. Sd/- P .B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. Kvs/- // true copy // "