*POTTANATTU SREEDHARANNAIR BABU * V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/7119/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Pottanattu Sreedharannair Babu, the petitioner, challenging an order of assessment under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-2018. The petitioner argued that their response to the assessment was incorrectly recorded as 'not received', violating the principles of natural justice. The respondents, including various income tax authorities, contended that the order could be challenged through statutory appellate proceedings and that the petitioner's response was actually received after the due date. The court examined the assessment order and found that the petitioner's response had indeed been considered, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 759147 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: G KEERTHIVAS; P G JAYASHANKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: TOMSON EMMANUEL
• Keywords: Appellate remedy; Income tax assessment; Natural Justice; Typographical error
• Section: 148; 142(1); 274; 148A; 272(1)(d)

Judgement Text

"WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:26206 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 PETITIONER : * * POTTANATTU SREEDHARANNAIR BABU, AGED 58 YEARS, C/O.HAMEED P PERINKADAKKATT HOUSE, PAINGOTTUR CALICUT UNIVERSITY, CHELEMBRA, CALICUT UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM, KERALA -673 635 [MOHAMMED ANAS K.P., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.HAMZA, KALATHIL PARAMBIL, KALATHIL PARAMBIL HOUSE, KADAVANAD, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM, KERALA – 679 586] (NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER IS CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.02.2025 IN I.A.01/2025 IN WP(C)2986/2025) POTTANATTU SREEDHARANNAIR BABU, AGED 58 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, MAHALAKSHMI PACKERS, MARATHAKKARA P O; THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 036 (THE ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER IS SUO MOTU CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-03-2025 IN WPC 7119/2025) BY ADV TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS : 1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DCIT CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SHAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 2 ASSISTANT/ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE - 1(1)(2), (NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRAL), NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001 WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:26206 3 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE RANGE 1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, COCHIN, PIN - 682018 4 UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN – 110 001 BY SRI.G.KEERTHIVAS, SC BY SRI.P.G. JAYASHANKAR, SENIOR SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:26206 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- W.P.(C).No.7119 of 2025 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 24th day of March, 2025 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging an order of assessment under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') for the assessment year 2017- 2018. 2. Petitioner is an assessee under the Act and challenges Ext.P10 order of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18. According to the petitioner, the response filed by the assessee is referred in Ext.P10 'as not received' as is evident from the tabular column in the assessment order, which is incorrect and hence the principles of natural justice stands violated, warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. The learned Standing Counsel, however pointed out that the impugned order can be challenged in an appellate proceeding as per statute and no cause arises for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It was also submitted that the reply of the petitioner was received after the due date, while the reply received on 19.10.2024 had been specifically perused and if there is any error in its consideration, it has to be agitated in appeal. WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:26206 On a perusal of the impugned order, this Court notices that the reply of the assessee has been specifically adverted to and even considered. If there is an erroneous consideration of facts or even law, the remedy of the petitioner is to agitate it before the appellate authority. Of course in the impugned order which relates to the assessment year 2017-18, there is an observation that the assessee had not filed the return for the assessment year 2020-21. The said typographical error by itself, cannot render the entire order liable for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the petitioner has an equally efficacious, alternative remedy before the appellate authority. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed reserving the liberty of the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies, in accordance with law. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE RKM WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:26206 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7119/2025 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 27.03.2024 ISSUED U/S.148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR AY:2017-18, BY 1ST RESPONDENT, IN DIRECTING PETITIONER TO FILE RETURNS WITHIN 91 DAYS. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.03.2024 ISSUED U/S.148A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR AY:2017-18, BY 1ST RESPONDENT, ALONG WITH EXT P1 NOTICE. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN DATED 13.06.2024 FOR AY:2017-18, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH PROOF OF PAYMENT OF INCOME TAX DUE AS PER THE RETURN. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NOTICE DATED 30.07.2024 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, U/S.142(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR AY:2017-18. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.620317011191024, AGAINST RESPONSE MADE AGAINST EXT P4. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.620300991191024, AGAINST RESPONSE MADE AGAINST NOTICE U/S.142(1) OF IT ACT, ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NOTICE DATED 08.10.2024 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY:2017-18, U/S.142(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR AY:2017-18. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF E-PROCEEDINGS RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.619989951191024, ALONG WITH REPLY, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND OTHER DETAILS SOUGHT FOR IN EXT P7 NOTICE ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY: 2017-18. WP(C) NO. 7119 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:26206 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 13.01.2025 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY:2017-18, MECHANICALLY, WITHOUT CONSIDERING MANY OF THE CONTENTIONS IN EXT P8. Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 05.02.2025 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, FOR AY:2017-18, AS IF, NO RESPONSE FILED BY PETITIONER TO THE NOTICES. Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 05.02.2025, PROPOSING PENALTY U/S.274 READ WITH 272(1) (D) OF IT ACT, ISSUED ALONG WITH EXT P10 ASSESSMENT ORDER. Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2022 IN WP(C) NO.11456 OF 2022, PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT, IN DIRECTING TO PASS FRESH ORDERS AFTER FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURES CONTEMPLATED U/S.148A(B) OF IT ACT, AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BEING HEARD. Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF REPORTED DECISION PASSED BY THE CONSTITUTION BENCH OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2009-2011 OF 2003 IN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD; IN HOLDING THAT IN RE-ASSESSMENT MADE TOWARDS REASON TO BELIEVE, ESCAPED INCOME, THERE MUST BE TANGIBLE MATERIAL FOR THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF. "