THALI HOTELS AND DESTINATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED V. THE UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/9814/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Thali Hotels and Destinations Private Limited, which is the petitioner, contesting an assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Corporate Range-2, Kochi (the third respondent). The petitioner filed an appeal against the assessment order and simultaneously requested a stay on the realization of the assessed amounts. The primary grievance in the writ petition was the delay by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-I (the second respondent) in deciding the stay application, which led to the initiation of realization proceedings based on the assessment order. The court's intervention was sought to expedite the decision on the stay application and halt the realization proceedings temporarily.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 745101 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: V K SHAMSUDHEEN
• Assessee Lawyers: M GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR; P GOPINATH; K JOHN MATHAI; JOSON MANAVALAN; KURYAN THOMAS; PAULOSE ABRAHAM; NAYANPALLY RAMOLA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Realisation of amounts; Stay Application
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 9814 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) THALI HOTELS AND DESTINATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED 1/268, PARADE ROAD, FORT KOCHI-682001, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MS.LOURDES IRIATE SOLANA. BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM SMT.NAYANPALLY RAMOLA RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I, POORNIMA BUILDINGS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682036. 3. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), CORPORATE RANGE-2, C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018. R BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9814 of 2018 (B) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 26-12-2017 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 26-12-2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MANUAL FORM NO.35(APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) DATED 22-01-2018 ALONG WITH THE ELECTRONIC FORM NO.35, DATED 23-01-2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, CHALLENGING EXT.P-1 ORDER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 17-03-2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22-02-2018. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14-03-2018. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE SKS P .B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P .(C).No.9814 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income T ax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the third respondent. Aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P4 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P3 appeal. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part of the second respondent in passing orders on Ext.P4 application for stay. It is alleged by the petitioner in the writ petition that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard, in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition W.P. (c) No.9814/2018 -2- directing the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 application for stay, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until orders are passed on Ext.P4 application for stay, further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be deferred. Sd/- P .B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS "