P.P.ASHRAF V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP(C)/22645/2011

AI Insights

The case involves P.P. Ashraf, a government contractor, who faced issues with the Income Tax Department regarding the cancellation of his PAN card and subsequent tax recovery proceedings. Initially, Ashraf was issued a PAN card in 2003, which he used for his contracting work. However, he later discovered that two PAN cards had been issued with the same number, leading to the cancellation of his PAN card and the dismissal of his rectification application concerning tax deductions at source (TDS) from his payments. Ashraf filed a petition (Ext.P6) seeking the credit for TDS amounts, which was not addressed by the respondent. The court's decision focused on ensuring a timely response to Ashraf's petition and halting any tax recovery actions until a decision was made on his petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 727062 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2011
• 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; J R NAVAZ; NIVEDITA KAMATH
• Keywords: Income Tax; PAN card; Rectification Application; Tax liability; TDS
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22645 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.P. ASHRAF, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, AYSHA'S (MAS), CALICUT ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR, SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ, SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE II (2), TIRUR, MALAPPURAM- 676 505. BY ADV. MR.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 22645 of 2011(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RETURN ALONG WITH THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION DATED 22/01/2011 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22/07/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/07/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE INTIMATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/08/2011SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 22645 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 19th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was issued with a Pan Card bearing No. ACRPA1338E, by the Income-tax Department, which was issued in 2003. The petitioner is a contractor doing contract work on behalf of Government departments and others. He has disclosed the PAN to the awarders while quoting for tenders. From the amounts due to the petitioner, tax was deducted at source and was paid to the Income-tax Department in the PAN of the petitioner. The petitioner received an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act calling upon him to make a payment of Rs. 1,22,000/- in respect of alleged tax liability of the petitioner. He applied for rectification of the same, enclosing Form No. 16A furnished by the contractors taking the stand that tax has been deducted at source and paid to the Income- tax Department. Thereupon, the respondent found out that two PAN cards were issued in the same number as that of the petitioner. Accordingly, the PAN card issued to petitioner has been cancelled and the rectification petition was disposed of on those grounds. But the petitioner was not given any credit for the amounts paid by the awarders by TDS. In respect of the same, the petitioner has filed Ext.P6 petition before the respondent. The petitioner seeks disposal of the same. 2. I have heard the standing Counsel for the Income-tax Department also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of W.P(C) No. 22645 of 2011 -: 2 :- this writ petition with the following directions: The respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 as expeditiously as possible. Until orders are passed on Ext.P6, proceedings for recovery of tax as per Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ "