M/S. POPULAR DEALERS V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)

WP(C)/36681/2016

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Popular Dealers, represented by its managing partner Prabha Thomas, who filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer (TDS) and other tax authorities concerning orders issued for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17. The petitioner challenged the recovery actions initiated by the tax authorities despite having filed appeals and related petitions (delay condonation and stay) with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The main legal contention was the premature recovery actions taken by the tax authorities while the appeals were still pending. The court did not delve into the merits of the case but focused on the procedural aspect, ensuring that the appellate authority addresses the petitions promptly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699516 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISANKAR MENON; MEERA MENON
• Keywords: Delay condonation; Income Tax; Recovery; Stay Petition; TDS

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY , THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/25TH KARTHIKA, 1938 WP(C).No. 36681 of 2016 (I) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------- M/S. POPULAR DEALERS, POPULAR TOWERS, VAKAYAR P.O., KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER PRABHA THOMAS. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), ARATTUKULAKKARA COMPLEX, AN PURAM, ALAPPUZHA 688 011. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SASTRI ROAD, KOTTA YAM 686 001. 3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), 3RD FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PAN DALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Msd. WP(C).No. 36681 of 2016 (I) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 17.05.2016. P1(A) COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 23.05.2016. P1(B) COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 31.05.2016. P1(C) COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 12.08.2016. P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P2(A) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P2(B) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P2(C) COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P3 COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P3(A) COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P3(B) COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P3(C) COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P4(A) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. P4(B) COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. ..2/- ..2.. WP(C).No. 36681 of 2016 (I) ---------------------------------------- P4(C) COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09.11.2016. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE. Msd. A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36681 of 2016 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2016 J U D G M E N T Petitioner has filed Ext.P2 series appeals before the 2nd respondent and along with the appeals, petitioner has also filed Exts.P3 series delay condonation petitions and Ext.P4 series stay petitions. It is submitted that during the pendency of the appeals, steps are being taken by the respondent authorities for recovering the amount pursuant to Exts.P1 to P1(c) orders. 2. Having regard to the fact that appeals are pending before the competent authority, I do not think it necessary to consider the matter on merits. Suffice to say that the appellate authority has to consider the delay condonation petitions and stay petitions on merits within a specified time and in the meantime, the recovery can be kept in abeyance. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under: (i) The 2nd respondent shall consider the delay condonation petitions and stay petitions filed along with the appeals within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. (ii) In the meantime, the demand made pursuant to Exts.P1 to P1(c) shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE AV "