THYPARAMBIL SKARIA JAMES V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/27305/2016

AI Insights

The case involves Thyparambil Skaria James, the petitioner, who approached the Kerala High Court seeking intervention regarding an appeal dismissed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for non-appearance. The petitioner contended that he did not receive the notice of hearing, which led to the dismissal of his appeal (Ext.P10). He had previously remitted 25% of the outstanding tax demand and filed a stay petition, which was still pending. Facing coercive recovery steps, the petitioner requested the court to direct the Tribunal to consider his application for restoration of the appeal (Ext.P11).

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 758781 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH JOHN
• Keywords: Appeal; Coercive Steps; Dismissal for non appearance; Income Tax; Restoration of appeal

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/27TH SRAVANA, 1938 WP(C).No. 27305 of 2016 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- THYPARAMBIL SKARIA JAMES, PALLATHARA HOUSE, NELLIKAMON PO, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVALLA RANGE, ENNIKATTIL ESTATE, NEAR KSRTC BUS STATION, THIRUVALLA - 689 101. 2.THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANADU, KOCHI. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/ WP(C).No. 27305 of 2016 (K) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------- P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 21.4.2010. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 28.3.2014 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTER DATED 22.2.2014 ISSUED BY THE BROTHER OF THE PETITIONER. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTER DATED 22.2.2014 ISSUED BY THE SON OF THE PETITIONER. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.9.2014 IN WPC NO.22924 OF 2014. P6 : A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 9.8.2014 SHOWING REMITTANCE OF RS.62,100/- P6(A) : A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 22.9.2014 SHOWING REMITTANCE OF RS.62,100/- P6(B) : A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 16.10.2014 SHOWING REMITTANCE OF RS.62,100/- P7 : A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS) DATED 29.10.2015 DISMISSING THE APPEAL. P8 : A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF APPEAL AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL. P9 : A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P10 : A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2016 DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR DEFAULT. P11 : A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR SETTING ASIDE EXT.P10 ORDER AND FOR RESTORING THE APPEAL DATED 7.4.2016 SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. P12 : A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL POSTING NOTICE, POSTING THE CASE NO.27.5.2016. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL ----------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/ A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.27305 of 2016 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August 2016 J U D G M E N T Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the 2nd respondent, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to consider Ext.P11 application for restoration. According to the petitioner, the appeal came to be dismissed for non-appearance. 2. Though it was stated in Ext.P10 order that notice of hearing was sent by registered post with acknowledgment due, according to the petitioner, he was not in receipt of the notice, which resulted in Ext.P10 order and all these facts have been stated in Ext.P11 application. It is also stated that during the pendency of the first appeal, petitioner had remitted 25% of the outstanding demand and a stay petition was also filed along with the appeal, which is pending before the Tribunal. In the meantime, the petitioner is faced with coercive steps and therefore the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the aforesaid direction. Having regard to the limited request made by the petitioner, it will only be appropriate to issue the following directions: W.P.C.No.27305/2016 2 i) That the 2nd respondent shall consider Ext.P11 and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ii) Until disposal of Ext.P11 application, recovery steps, if any, shall be kept in abeyance. (sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr "