Smt. Anila Kumari V. The National Faceless Assessment Centre and The Income Tax Officer, Thiruvalla Range, Ward 1 & TPS and The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre

WP(C)/41318/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Anila Kumari, the widow of late Jayaprakash P, who filed a writ petition challenging the income tax assessments and penalties imposed on her late husband's estate for the assessment year 2014-2015. The Income Tax Department had added a substantial amount of Rs. 1,25,20,000 as income from other sources under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on a bank report, which the petitioner contested, claiming that her husband never possessed such funds. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to expedite the appeals process and stay the recovery actions based on the contested assessments and penalties.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 799750 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: AJI DEV; ALAN DEV; S JOSEPH; P S JOSEPH
• Keywords: Delay Application; Income tax assessment; Penalty; Stay Application; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 147; 144; 271(1)(c); 69A; 271F; 144B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 41318 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: SMT. ANILA KUMARI AGED 55 YEARS W/O. LATE JAYAPRAKASH, PRAKASH MANDIRAM, KODUMON, PATHANAMTHITTA -, PIN - 691555 BY ADVS. AJI V.DEV ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV S.SAJEEVAN JOSEPH P.S. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE CONNAUGHT LANE, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PIN - 110001 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVALLA RANGE, WARD 1 & TPS, THIRUVALLA, PIN - 689101 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, DELHI -, PIN - 110003 OTHER PRESENT: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 41318 OF 2023 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 8th day of December, 2023 1.The present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:- “i. Call for the records and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in EXT.P.3, EXT.P.4(a) and EXT.P.5(a) appeals as expeditiously as possible. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction staying further proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to EXT.P.2, P.4 & P.5 orders as demanded through EXT.P.6 demand notice. iii. Alternatively, call for the records and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rdrespondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in EXT.P.3(a) interlocutory application for condonation of delay and EXT.P.4(b) & EXT.P.5(b) interlocutory applications for stay as expeditiously as possible.” 2.The petitioner, who is a widow, was dependent on the income of her late husband Mr. Jayaprakash P, who was an auto rickshaw driver. The assessment under Section 147 r/w Section 144 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( ‘the IT Act’ for short) was completed in respect of the assessment year 2014-2015 of the income of the petitioner’s husband. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 1,25,20,000/- was reported by the Bank to the income tax WP(C) NO. 41318 OF 2023 3 authority and the said amount was added under Section 69A of the IT Act, as the income from other sources. The assessment order was finalized with the tax, penalty and interest demand. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s husband never had this kind of money and the statement of the bank would disclose that said amount was never remitted to the account of the petitioner’s husband. 4.Considering the said fact and circumstances and also taken into consideration that appeals have been filed in Exts.P3(a), Ext.P4(b) and Ext.P5(b) against the Exts.P1, P4 and P5 orders, this court deem it appropriate to direct the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the delay application and stay application filed along with the appeals, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months. No recovery shall be effected from the petitioner in respect of the orders in Exts.P1, P4 and P5 till then. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE SJ WP(C) NO. 41318 OF 2023 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41318/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2014-15 DATED 19.03.2022 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 04.01.2016 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 20.10.2022 Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 22.11.2023 Exhibit P3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 22.11.2023 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271(1)(C) DATED 24.09.2022 Exhibit P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST PENALTY ORDER U/S 271(1)(C) DATED 20.10.2022 Exhibit P4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 22.11.2023 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER U/S 271F DATED 24.09.2022 Exhibit P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST PENALTY ORDER U/S 271F DATED 20.10.2022 Exhibit P5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY DATED 22.11.2023 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.09.2023 "