SRI.VINEESH M V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)

WP(C)/31865/2014

AI Insights

The case involves Sri. Vineesh M., the petitioner, who challenged the coercive actions taken by the Income Tax authorities despite the pendency of his appeals and stay petitions regarding an assessment order and a penalty order for the assessment year 2005-06. The petitioner had already filed appeals against the assessment and penalty orders, which were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), respectively. The petitioner sought the High Court's intervention to halt the coercive measures until his appeals were resolved. The court's decision emphasized the need for timely judicial consideration of stay petitions in tax disputes to prevent undue hardship to the taxpayer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755700 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL NAIR; SREEJITH NAIR; ROSIE JOSEPH; SOUMYA PRAKASH; SULEKHA C S
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Coercive Steps; Income Tax; Penalty order; Stay Petition

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936 WP(C).No. 31865 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : ----------------------- SRI.VINEESH M., MEKKUNNATH HOUSE, RIVER VIEW, CHALAPPURAM P.O, CALICUT- 673 002 BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.SREEJITH R.NAIR SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SMT.SOUMYA PRAKASH SMT.SULEKHA BEEVI C.S RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (2), CALICUT - 673 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I (5), KOZHIKODE -673 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1, KOZHIKODE- 673 001 4. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM -682 018 5. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER,KOZHIKODE- 673 001 R1 TO R5 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 31865 of 2014 (G) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23-12-2008 FOR THE YEAR 2005-2006 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED UPON P1 BY (FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY) THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 09-01-2014 FOR THE YEAR 2005-2006 TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AGAINST P2 FILED AND PENDING BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006 EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P3 BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006 EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P3 BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006 EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 11-06-2014 FOR THE YEAR 2005-2006 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL AGAINST P6 FILED AND PENDING BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006 EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P7 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006 EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P7 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-2006. EXT.P10 - TRUE COPY OF THE GARNISHEE NOTICE ISSUED BY FIFTH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 31865 of 2014 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 28th day of November, 2014 JUDGMENT Being aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed by the first respondent and Ext. P6 penalty order passed by the second respondent for the assessment year 2005 - '06, the petitioner has already preferred Ext. P3 appeal along with Ext. P5 interlocutory application for stay in respect of Ext. P1 assessment order and Ext. P7 appeal along with Ext. P9 petition for stay in respect of Ext. P6 penalty order, which are pending consideration before the fourth respondent and third respondent respectively. The grievance of the petitioner is that without any regard to the pendency of the above proceedings, the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps, which hence are sought to be intercepted. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the fourth respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P5 petition for stay and the third respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P9 petition for stay, in accordance with law, as W.P.(C) No. 31865 of 2014 : 2 : expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till such time. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the fourth respondent and third respondent for further steps. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd "