T.S. Aji V. Income Tax Officer Ward No.1, Kalpetta and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kozhikode and National Faceless Appeals Centre, New Delhi

WA/2036/2023

AI Insights

T.S. Aji, the appellant, challenged the condition imposed by the Income Tax Officer requiring the remittance of 20% of the tax demand for his deceased father's case to be treated as non-default. The father had previously appealed against the assessment order, and after his death, the appellant continued the challenge. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions, suggesting that the appellant could file stay applications with the Appellate Authority, which the court would consider expeditiously.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 797307 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: S ANANTHAKRISHNAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Statutory Appeals; Stay Application; Condition for Non-Default
• Section: 220(6)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 2031 OF 2023 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 33920/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: T.S. AJI AGED 50 YEARS S/O. LATE SUNNY THANDEKKATTU THOMAS, THANDEKKATTIL HOUSE, MEENANGADI P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673591 BY ADV S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.1, KALPETTA, PIN - 673122 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673001 3 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE C-BLOCK, SPM CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(NFAC)., PIN - 110001 SC: ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.12.2023, ALONG WITH WA NO.2036/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.2031 & 2036/2023 -:2:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023/14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 2036 OF 2023 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 33911/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: T.S.AJI AGED 50 YEARS S/O. LATE SUNNY THANDEKKATTU THOMAS, THANDEKKATTIL HOUSE, MEENANGADI P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673591 BY ADV S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.1, KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673122 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AYAKAR BHAVAN, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673001 3 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEALS CENTRE C-BLOCK, SPM CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(NFAC), PIN - 110001 WA Nos.2031 & 2036/2023 -:3:- OTHER PRESENT: SC ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.12.2023, ALONG WITH WA NO.2031/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA Nos.2031 & 2036/2023 -:4:- J U D G M E N T Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J. In these writ appeals, the appellant is aggrieved by the identical orders passed by the 1st respondent to remit 20% of the demand as a condition for treating him as a person not in default. 2. The appellant's father was an assessee under the Income T ax Act, 1961 (for short, the IT Act). Aggrieved by the assessment order, the appellant's father preferred statutory appeals before the Commissioner of Income T ax (Appeals). The appellant's father also moved an application u/s 220(6) of the IT Act before the 1st respondent. In response to the said application, the 1st respondent asked the appellant's father to remit 20% of the demand as a condition for treating him as a person not in default. In the meanwhile, the appellant's father died. The appellant filed writ petitions challenging the said condition WA Nos.2031 & 2036/2023 -:5:- imposed. After hearing both sides, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions. The appellant is before us challenging the judgments in the writ petitions. 3. We have heard Sri.S. Ananthakrishnan, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned standing counsel for the income tax department. As stated already, the appeals preferred by the appellant's father against the assessment orders are pending before the Appellate Authority/the Commissioner of Income T ax (Appeals). The appellant can very well move stay applications before the Appellate Authority. It appears that the appellant has moved no such stay applications. The learned Single Judge has granted one week's time to the appellant to file the stay applications. We see no illegality in the impugned judgments. Hence, we dismiss the writ appeals. However, if the appellant prefers stay applications before the Commissioner of Income T ax (Appeals) within one week from today, he shall consider and dispose of either the stay applications or the appeals itself within a period of three weeks WA Nos.2031 & 2036/2023 -:6:- after the receipt of the stay applications after hearing both sides. Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp "