V.AJAYAKUMAR V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP(C)/3758/2011

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by brothers V. Ajayakumar against various officials of the Income Tax Department concerning attachments made on their immovable properties due to tax assessments and potential penalties. The assessments were completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, and attachments were made through notices to secure the amounts due. The petitioners argued that the total amounts assessed were less than Rs. 15 lakhs each and offered a Bank Guarantee to release the attachments. The respondents contended that penalties were also to be secured, justifying the continued attachments. The court decided to direct the 1st respondent to reconsider the release of attachments based on the petitioner's offer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 756023 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 09-02-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: K SRIKUMAR; K CHANDRAN; P R AJITHKUMAR
• Keywords: Bank guarantee; Income tax assessment; Penalty proceedings; Property Attachment
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3758 of 2011(T) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- V.AJAYAKUMAR , VRA-A6, SREE AYSWARYA, ARIKKADAMKKU, NEMOM PO, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, DEVIKRIPA, PALLIKUKKU, PETTAH, TRIVANDRUM 695 024. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1) TRIVANDRUM 695 024. 3. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (3) TRIVANDRUM 695 024. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TRIVANDRUM 695 024. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,TRIVANDRUM 695 024. 6. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE ,5TH FLOOR, KANDAMKULATHY TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI 682 011. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/02/2011, ALONG WITH WPC.NO.3914/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).Nos. 3758 and 3914 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioners in both these cases are brothers. Assessments were completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, against the petitioners, by virtue of Ext.P2 series orders in WP(C). 3758/11 and Ext.P2 order in WP(C). 3914/11. For realising the amounts covered under the orders of assessment, attachments were effected on various items of immovable properties, belonging to the petitioners, their wives and other family members, through Ext.P3 series notices in both the cases and p6 in WP(C). 3758/11. 2. Contention of the petitioners is that the amounts covered under the assessments in both these cases will be less than Rs.15 lakhs each. The petitioner had approached the 1st respondent through various requests to release the attachments on the basis of specific offer to furnish Bank guarantee for the amounts due under the orders of assessment. Since the 1st respondent has not acceded to such requests, these writ petitions are filed. W.P.(C).3758 & 3914/11 -2- 3. Heard standing counsel appearing for the respondents. It is submitted that, apart from the assessments, proceedings for imposing penalty against the petitioners were already initiated and such amounts are also to be secured. Hence despite the offer for furnishing Bank Guarantee for the tax amount assessed, the attachments could not be released, is the contention. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner on the other hand submitted that if attachment is continued with respect to any one of the items of the properties, it will be sufficient to cover the probable demand which may arise out of all the proceedings. 5. Considering the above mentioned circumstances, I am of the view that the 1st respondent can be directed to take appropriate decision with respect to the request for release of the attachment on various items of immovable properties, on the basis of the offer to furnish Bank Guarantee and to retain attachment in any of the items of properties which is worth enough to cover the liability on the event of penalty being imposed. 6. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the request made by the petitioner for release of the attachment on the basis of the offer for furnishing W.P.(C).3758 & 3914/11 -3- Bank Guarantee for the demand now pending. 1st respondent will consider the request and take appropriate decision, if the petitioner furnishes the Bank Guarantee for the existing demands. The release of the attachment can be considered after retaining any items of properties which are sufficient to cover the probable demand in case any penalty is imposed. 7. A decision in this regard shall be taken as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb "