SMT. MANJU AJITHKUMAR V. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/629/2013

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Manju Ajithkumar, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and other respondents following a series of assessments from 2004-05 to 2010-11 under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner contested the recovery proceedings initiated based on these assessments, despite having paid 50% of the revised tax liabilities. The primary legal issue was whether the recovery proceedings should continue while the appeals against the assessments were pending. The court considered the petitioner's compliance in paying a substantial part of the revised tax and the ongoing appeals against the assessments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 768341 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: WP(c) 10230/12
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL SIVARAMAN; RAJI VINCENT
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment; Income Tax; Recovery proceedings; Stay
• Section: 132

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/17TH POUSHA 1934 WP(C).No. 629 of 2013 (C) ------------------------- PETITIONER : - ------------------------ SMT. MANJU AJITHKUMAR, \"SUMTHRUPTHI\", RAJADHANI BUILDINGS, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 023. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN SMT.RAJI VINCENT RESPONDENTS : - -------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, ERNAKULAM - 682 018. 3. THE COMMISIONER OF WEALTH TAX (APPEALS)-III, ERNAKULAM - 682 018. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), 5th FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHIL TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN - 682 011. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 629 of 2013 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT P1 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2004-05). EXT P2 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2005-06). EXT P3 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2006-07). EXT P4 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2007-08). EXT P5 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2008-09). EXT P6 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2009-10). EXT P7 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT (AY:2010-11). EXT P8 : TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3rd RESPONDENT (AY:2004-05). EXT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY. EXT P10 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE 1st RESPONDENT. EXT P11 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 24.4.2012 IN WP(c) 10230/12. EXT P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 5th RESPONDENT. EXT P13 : TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.11.2012. EXT P14 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21.11.2012. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL. // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/- ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.629 OF 2013(C) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2013 J U D G M E N T Following a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, assessments were completed against the petitioner for the years 2004-05 to 2010-2011. Against those assessment orders Exts.P1 to P7 appeals have been filed. These appeals are pending consideration of the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, subsequently the assessment orders were revised and liability was also reduced. It is also her case that 50% of the tax due under the revised assessment orders have been paid by her. Despite the payments made as above, recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders are being continued. It is with this grievance the writ petition is filed. 2. Although the Standing Counsel for the revenue objected to the contention of the petitioner pointing out Ext.P11 judgment and that the petition filed for clarification is pending, still having regard to the fact that according to the petitioner, 50% of the tax WPC.No. 629/2013 :2 : due from her had already been paid, I see no reason why the recovery should be allowed to continue, pending disposal of the appeal. Therefore I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions; i. That the 2nd respondent appellate authority shall pass orders on Exts.P1 to P7 appeals as expeditiously as possible. ii. In the meanwhile, in view of the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that 50% of the tax had already been remitted, I direct that the recovery pursuant to the assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance. However, any attachment that has already effected by the respondents will remain in force, during the pendency of the appeal. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ "