M/S.TRANS ASIAN SHIPPING SERVICES(P)LTD. V. INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/21366/2011

AI Insights

The case involves M/S. Trans Asian Shipping Services (P) Ltd, a shipping line operation company, which filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ernakulam, along with Kiran Devi Sah, the proprietrix of M/S. Kunal Sales Corporation. The dispute arose when the 3rd respondent deducted income tax at source from amounts due to the petitioner but failed to account for these deductions with the Income Tax Department. The petitioner sought judicial intervention to compel the respondents to initiate proceedings against the 3rd respondent under various sections of the Income Tax Act and to recover the deducted amounts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699189 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: G KRISHNAKUMAR; P H SHAJI; TITTO THOMAS
• Keywords: Income Tax; Mandamus; Prosecution; Recovery; Tax deduction at source; Writ petition; Non-Accounting of Tax
• Section: 201; 221; 276-B; 203(A)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21366 of 2011(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- M/S.TRANS ASIAN SHIPPING SERVICES(P)LTD, TRANS ASIAN CORPORATE PARK, SEA PORT-AIRPORT ROAD, CHITTETHUKARA, KAKKANAD, REPRESENTED BY IT'S DIRECTOR MARYLIN JOHNSON. BY ADVS. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR, SRI.P.H.SHAJI (THRIKKAKARA), SRI.TITTO THOMAS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, IST CIRCLE, WARD 2, IS PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM. PIN-682 002. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, IS PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM. PIN-682 002. 3. KIRAN DEVI SAH, W/O.HUSBAND'S NAME & AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PROPRIETRIX- M/S.KUNAL SALES CORPORATION, 41-1277(C), KOCKAL CHAMBER, C.P.UMMER ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 682 002. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.21366/2011 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES OF DEDUCTION OF TAX, DTD. 4/3/2009 ISSUED BY M/S. KUNAL SALES CORPORATION EVIDENCING DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE FROM THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES OF DEDUCTION OF TAX, DTD. 3/04/2009 ISSUED BY M/.S KUNAL SALES CORPORATION EVIDENCING DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE FROM THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 22/02/2010 PREFERRED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 21366 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of shipping line operations. In the course of the business, amounts became due from the 3rd respondent to the petitioner. The 3rd respondent deducted income tax at source. But, on enquiry, the petitioner came to understand that the tax deducted at source was not accounted for with the Income Tax Department. The petitioner, therefore, initiated proceedings for initiating actions under Sections 201, 203(A), 221 & 276(B) of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner's grievance is that the 1st respondent is not taking any action in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 representation before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs; “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriates (sic) writ, order or direction directing commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to initiate proceedings against the 3rd respondent under Section 201, 203(A) , 221 & 276(B) of the Income Tax Act and to recover the amount covered under Exhibit P1 and P2 and to prosecute the defaulter. (ii) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to get credit of the amount covered by Exhibit P1 & P2.” 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 also. 3. I am of opinion that it is only appropriate that the 2nd respondent passes orders on Ext.P3 expeditiously after hearing the w.p.c.21366/11 2 petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge "