M/S.ST.THOMAS TIMBER INDUSTRIES V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)

WP(C)/17762/2016

AI Insights

The case involves M/S St. Thomas Timber Industries, represented by its proprietor Thomas George, challenging an order (Ext.P6) passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding a stay petition linked to an appeal for the assessment year 2010-11. The petitioner argued that the demand to pay the entire assessed amount was harsh, especially when substantial contentions were to be argued in the appeal. The court considered the precedents and the current legal framework, particularly referencing the judgment in Excel Timbers Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, which influenced the decision. The court decided to modify the payment terms, allowing the petitioner to pay the demanded amount in installments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755542 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Excel Timbers Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: O RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR; GREEN MATHEW
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Year 2010-11; Income Tax; Stay Petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2016/30TH VAISAKHA, 1938 WP(C).No. 17762 of 2016 (U) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : --------------------------- M/S.ST.THOMAS TIMBER INDUSTRIES, KUNDANNOOR, MARADU POST - 682304, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,THOMAS GEORGE. BY ADVS.SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MA THEW RESPONDENT(S) : ----------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) KOCHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, C.R. BUILDINGS, I.S. PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) III, 1ST FLOOR, POORNIMA, 28/243, NEAR MANORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 036. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PAN DALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Msd. WP(C).No. 17762 of 2016 (U) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11/12/2014. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21/04/2015. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STA Y PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT-P2 APPEAL. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24/02/2016 IN W.P(C).NO.6968/2016. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STA Y ORDER DATED 12/04/2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE. Msd. A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J. ============= W.P. (C) No. 17762 of 2016 =================== Dated this, the 20th day of May, 2016 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P6, an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in a stay petition with reference to an appeal filed against orders passed for assessment year 2010-11. Petitioner submits that as against the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No. 14431/2014 (Excel Timbers Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax), appeals are heard by a Division Bench of this Court and are reserved for orders. In the meantime, when the petitioner has substantial contentions to be urged in the appeal, the authority had called upon the petitioner to remit the entire amount demanded. It is contended that when substantial contentions are urged in the appeal, the direction to pay entire amount is too harsh. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents as well. 3. A perusal of Ext.P6 would clearly indicate that the appellate authority had considered the stay petition on merits. As W.P(C) No.17762/16 -:2:- law stands today, the judgment in Excel Timbers Private Limited (supra) holds the field. Under such circumstances, I do not find any error in the order passed by the appellate authority directing the petitioner to remit the amount demanded. The authority had further granted time to pay the amount in four equal monthly instalments of `1,06,478/- each month, starting from May 2016. 4. Taking into consideration the fact that the appeal against Excel Timbers Private Limited (supra) is reserved for judgment by the Division Bench, I am of the view that some indulgence can be shown to the petitioner to remit the amount and accordingly, Ext.P6 is modified as under. 5. That the payment of `4,25,913/- shall be made in four equal monthly instalments of `1,06,478/- each month, starting from 20/6/2016. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp20/05/2016 //True Copy// P.S to Judge "