SANGEETH NURSING HOME V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

WP(C)/16611/2011

AI Insights

The case involves Sangeeth Nursing Home, represented by its managing partner Dr. Sasanga R Prabhu, who filed a writ petition against the income tax authorities concerning an assessment order. The petitioner had filed an appeal and a stay petition regarding the assessment order, which were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II. Despite the pendency of these proceedings, recovery actions were initiated based on a notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The petitioner sought relief from the High Court to halt these recovery actions until the appeal and stay petition were resolved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 756010 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: MOHAN PULIKKAL; MANJU RAJAN; K S ARUN BABU; K JAYASANKAR
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Recovery Steps; Stay Petition

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 16611 of 2011(B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SANGEETH NURSING HOME ,5/1496,SOUTH CHERLAI, KOCHI 682 002, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER DR.SASANGA R PRABHU. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL SMT.MANJU RAJAN SRI.K.S.ARUN BABU SRI.K.JAYASANKAR (KAPRASSERY) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) II ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI 682 018. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C.R. BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD KOCHI 682 018. 3. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE I, MATTANCHERRY 2ND FLOOR, ASOKA BUILDING KARUVELIPADY,KOCHI 682 005. BY ADV.SRI.JOSE JOSEPH S.C THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16611 of 2011(B) APPENDIX EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED O4.12.2009 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE APPICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED O9.09.2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.09.2010 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED O7.12.2010 FROM M/S.GEORGE, JOHN & PRABHU, CHARTERED ACCOIUNTANTS, TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.02.2011 FROM M/S.GEORGE, JOHN & PRABHU, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.03.2011 FROM THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.03.2011 FROM THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.02.2011 FROM THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P11- TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY DATED 12.04.2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P12- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED O7.06.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE MNS C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 16611 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 order of assessment, the petitioner had filed appeal before the 1st respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P2. Along with the appeal the petitioner had filed stay petition, as evidenced from Ext.P11. It is submitted that the appeal as well as the stay petition are pending consideration and disposal before the 1st respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that, without considering pendency of the appeal, recovery steps has now been initiated, on the basis of Ext.P12 notice issued. 2. Heard; learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering pendency of the statutory appeal, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the appellate authority to expedite the matter. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P11 stay petition, if the appeal is already registered and the same is in order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, WP(C).16611/2011 2 as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment . 4. Till such time orders are passed by the 1st respondent as directed above, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P1, which is now initiated on the basis of Ext.P12 notice, shall be kept in abeyance. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).16611/2011 3 "