SUBSCRIBERS CHITS (P) LTD. V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/25553/2013

AI Insights

The case involves Subscribers Chits (P) Ltd., represented by its chairman, Sri M.G. Sukumaran, who filed a writ petition against the Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and other related officials. The petitioner challenged the penalty orders for the financial years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12, and sought a blanket stay on criminal proceedings based on the potential impact of the appeals on the criminal prosecution. The respondents argued that a blanket stay would hinder their ability to proceed with criminal prosecution due to the limitation period. The court decided to defer further criminal proceedings until the appeals are resolved, while allowing the initiation of criminal prosecution.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755824 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Bhupen Champak Lal Dalal and Another [(2001) 3 SCC 459]
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: A K JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR; M GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR; P GOPINATH; P BENNY THOMAS; K MATHAI; PREETHA NAIR
• Keywords: Appeal; Criminal prosecution; Income Tax; Penalty
• Section: 276B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/15TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 25553 of 2013 (T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- SUBSCRIBERS CHITS (P) LTD. 1ST FLOOR, SONA SUPER MARKET BUILDING, CONVENT ROAD THRISSUR-682 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SRI.M.G.SUKUMARAN. BY ADVS.SRI.A.K.JAY ASANKARAN NAMBIAR (SR.) SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SMT.PREETHA S.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD COCHIN-682 018. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR, KERA BHAVAN, SRVHS ROAD KOCHI-682 011. 3. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD COCHIN-682 018. 4. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD COCHIN-682 018. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DCS WP(C).No. 25553 of 2013 (T) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.08.2013 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10. P2- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.08.2013 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11. P3- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.08.2013 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12. P4- COPY OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT ANNEXURES DATED 27.09.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT CHALLENGING EXT.P1 ORDER. P5- COPY OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT ANNEXURES DATED 27.09.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT CHALLENGING EXT.P2 ORDER. P6- COPY OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT ANNEXURES DATED 27.09.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT CHALLENGING EXT.P3 ORDER. P7- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.3.2013 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P8- COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 8.4.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. P9- COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 13.6.2013 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE DCS V.CHITAMBARESH,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 25553 of 2013 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2013 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Exts. P4, P5 and P6 appeals against Exts. P1, P2 and P3 orders imposing penalty. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext. P9 letter intimating the decision of the respondents to launch criminal prosecution against it. 2. The petitioner contends that the verdict in Exts.P4, P5 and P6 appeals may have a bearing on the criminal prosecution launched. A blanket stay of criminal proceedings is sought relying on Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai v. Bhupen Champak Lal Dalal and Another [(2001) 3 SCC 459]. 3. The respondents contend that such a blanket stay would perhaps disable them from launching criminal prosecution at a later point of time. The criminal prosecution have to be launched with due diligence lest the bar of limitation steps in. 4. I direct the second respondent to consider Exts. P4, P5 and P6 appeals with notice to the petitioner. The needful shall be done within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) No. 25553 of 2013 2 5. The respondents are entitled to initiate criminal prosecution under Section 276B of the Income Tax Act as desired. But further proceedings on the file of the criminal court after the complaint is filed shall be deferred till orders are passed on Exts. P4, P5 and P6 appeals. The writ petition is disposed of. SD/- V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS "