SACRED HEART MONASTERY V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/20240/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Sacred Heart Monastery Thevara, Cochin, represented by its prior, Fr. Paulose Kidangen CMI, as the petitioner, contesting orders from the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-II). The petitioner appealed against the assessment and rectification orders under the Income Tax Act, which confirmed certain tax liabilities. Pending the decision on a stay petition filed with the appellate authority, the petitioner approached the Income Tax Officer, who mandated a 20% deposit of the confirmed amount as a condition for stay. The petitioner challenged this directive in the High Court, arguing that such a condition was inappropriate while the appellate authority had not yet decided on the stay petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 753290 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: JOSEPH MARKOSE; V MARKOS; ABRAHAM MARKOS; ISAAC THOMAS; P G ABRAHAM; ALEXANDER MARKOS; SHARAD KODANTHARA; ZAINAB IBRAHIM
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Rectified order; Stay Petition
• Section: 220(6)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 7TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.20240 OF 2020(D) PETITIONER: SACRED HEART MONASTERY THEVARA, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM - 682 013, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRIOR FR.POULOSE KIDANGEN CMI. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ISAAC THOMAS SRI.P.G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM SHRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHRI.SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA SMT.ZAINAB ZEBAIBRAHIM P.M. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD, SANJUAN TOWER, BEHIND CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS-II) NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCH - 682036. BY ADV.SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.20240 OF 2020(D) 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P3 assessment order and Ext.P4 rectified order under the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 appeal together with Ext.P6 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that pending disposal of the stay petition by the appellate authority he had approached the 1st respondent with a petition under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act when the 1st respondent mechanically directed the petitioner to remit 20% of the confirmed amount as a condition for a grant of stay pending disposal of the appeal. In the Writ Petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the stay application is yet to be considered by the 2nd respondent, and under such circumstances, there ought not to have been a direction to deposit amounts pending disposal of the stay application by the appellate authority. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I am of the view that there should not be a recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner pending disposal of the stay application by the 2nd respondent appellate WP(C).No.20240 OF 2020(D) 3 authority. Accordingly, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 stay petition within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Ext.P8 order of the 1st respondent shall stand quashed and the recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P3 and P4 orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent in Ext.P6 stay application as directed and the order communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns WP(C).No.20240 OF 2020(D) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED LEASE DEED DATED 07/01/2011. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED GIFT DEED DATED 16/02/2017. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27/12/2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR AY 2017-18. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION ORDER DATED 01/05/2020. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 29/01/2020. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 28/04/2020. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 04/09/2020. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/09/2020 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE "